> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:51:39 +0900 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > At Tue, 24 Apr 2007 19:43:25 +0200, > Simon L. Nielsen wrote: > > > > Can you "MTC" this so we can turn off and on RH0 processing on current > > > > systems? It would greatly simplify things for me if I didn't have to > > > > build two kernels and move back and forth to test things. > > > > > > +1 ... also is this going to be in the supported RELENG_X_Y branches as > > > well? > > > > Yes, once the foodwork required is done. > > You'll still have to build two kernels, it is just off by default > completely in HEAD. The IETF is currently discussing retiring the > option in which case the code will disappear completely from HEAD. > > Do you really think the option is required in HEAD?
I see RH0 as a very useful feature for troubleshooting in a network, but I really can't see why a non-routing system should every need or want it. It looks to me like it should be non-existent when routing is not enabled and off by default when it is enabled. That said, in these days of MPLS and wide-area VLANs, the usefulness of this option is far less than it was in the earlier days of the net and I can't remember the last time I used the loose-source route capability of IPv4. I have never used it in IPv6. If it does live on (in any form), it is important that IPFW2 be able to filter it properly (ala Bjoren's patches) so it can be limited to desired connections, typically internal connections. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751
pgpBIn9z3yZ2c.pgp
Description: PGP signature