On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 07:13 -0700, Sangeeta Misra wrote: > Sebastien, > > Could you provide input to Dan's question regarding the IPv6 code - > DM-9, DM-10?
Sure. > > DM-9 General T5 Just a question. Why the hell do we allocate > an mblk to store an nce? Shouldn't we use > kmem_alloc or kmem_cache_alloc()? > > RESP: Dont know > NOTE: Seb provide input There is no good reason as far as I can tell. A kmem cache would be better. Maybe the original implementer thought that these would get passed around to external resolvers, but that never actually happens. > > usr/src/uts/common/inet/ip/ip_ire.c > > ------- --------------- ------- > ----------------------------------------------- > No. Location Sev. Comment > ------- --------------- ------- > ----------------------------------------------- > > DM-10 General T5 I may have answered my own DM-9 question. > It has to do with passing-to-ARP STREAMS > crud, doesn't it? > > RESP: Dont think that is the reaosn we don't pass nce_t's to arp (ipv6 > is supposed to do neighbor discovery, not arp). Perhaps some v6 expert > can clarify this... > NOTE: Seb provide input External IPv6 resolvers don't use nce_t's, they use the crusty arp STREAMS interfaces (along with the arp data structures). I really don't think there's a good reason for allocb() to be used at all, and the nce_mp should just be blown away. -Seb _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
