--- "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote: > There is even an official IETF RFC written by Jamal, > Alexey, and > others documenting netlink btw :-)))))))))))) > > Did anybody notice this? It was defenitly a nice read, but the netlink2 draft is somewhat inconsistent, it mentions reducing the 32-bit length field to 16-bits and equally distributing the remaining 16-bits between the new version and extended flags fields, but the draft makes no further refrence to the version field. Infact the netlink2 message header diagram on page 16, as well as the pseudo message on page 28, show a 16-bits extended flags field with no version field in the header. So this is probably one of those cases in wich specs aren't clear enough and code usually has the final word in such situations. I mailed Jamal about this a while ago but never got a reply back. BTW, is netlink2 support planned for linux in the near future? David, sorry for the private mail, but it was unintentional as I (by mistake) pressed reply instead of reply all. Chaow, kotry __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
