On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 3:17 AM, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 06:15:07PM +0200, Julius Volz wrote: >> What is not supported with IPv6: >> - handling fragmentation or other extension headers >> - FTP application helper (can be loaded, but only operates on v4) >> - sync daemon (can be started, but only operates on v4) > > Other than the packet format of the sync deamon, are there any > fundamental restrictions here? If we extended the sync daemon, > could it work? If so, perhaps we could rev the sync deamon protocol > and fix a few other kinks, like the handling of timeouts and the > general lack of extendability, at the same time. There shouldn't be any fundamental restrictions, it's just a piece of the puzzle that I could easily leave out of the picture for now. I haven't studied the sync daemon closely yet, but one thing I was briefly wondering about was whether we should just blow up the addresses in struct ip_vs_sync_conn to be of type union nf_inet_addr (probably not acceptable, wasting too much bandwidth for v4 entries) or how to send differently sized entries based on the IP version in a clean way. But it sounds like you'd want to redesign a lot of that anyways? I'm glad to help with anything, I just don't know this code as well as you or Sven, but I'll study it more. Maybe you can share some ideas on the extensibility you want to see? >> Thanks for any comments! > > Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it), > I'm going to be away skiing for the next couple of days. Apologies > for the slow responses that will lead to. Have fun! And be careful, we need you to come back healthy :) Julius -- Google Switzerland GmbH -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
