On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 12:48:30PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > > You seem to make using libnet optional, is there a reason
> > > > not to just remove it? portability?
> > > 
> > > Agreed, lets just drop it.
> > 
> > Ack.
> > 
> > BTW, is it correct that most of it could be done by "ip", similar as
> > IPaddr2 does it?  The only think missing would be a send_arp v6.
> > Anyone want to write an IPv6addr2? ;-)
> 
> I believe that the main objection to using "ip" is that it doesn't exist
> outside of Linux.
> 
> If you look at the history of IPaddr vs IPaddr2.

Yes, I know.

> If we contrast this to IPv6addr, its cross platform,

Oh, I did not realize that.

> So no, I don't think there is a strong reason for an "ip" based
> IPv6addr2. And I really wish the IPaddr/IPaddr2 situation didn't exist.

me too ;-)

-- 
: Lars Ellenberg
: LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability
: DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com

DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

Reply via email to