In article <20030319.192331.95884882.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> (at Wed, 19 Mar 2003
19:23:31 -0800 (PST)), "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> says:
> > I'm going to apply this, with the small change that dev_getany() is
> > renamed to dev_get_by_flags() which more accurately describes
> > what the routine does.
> Again: I don't like API at all.
> Anycast address management itself in that patch would be ok.
> However, JOIN/LEAVE is NOT useful and userland application will be
> incompatible with other implementation. (sigh...)
> I think linux likes unicast model (assign address like unicast address),
> Please propose alternative API, or do you suggest not
> to export this facility to user at all?
I like to assign address like unicast (using ioctl and rtnetlink
We suggest you not exporting this facilicy until finishing new API
(And, another API would be standardized;
This is another reason why I am against exporting that API for now.)
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
GPG FP: 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF 80D8 4807 F894 E062 0EEA