I think the discussions have been valuable despite the time they took. This is just to bring us back to not go on a tangent and hopefully close this sooner.
There are two main outstanding issues as i see it: Issue-1) We have agreed to implement based on 2863. Stefan has gone one step further and suggested extra states for L3 status. The idea for the extra states being to resolve in this fix old standing issue (since 2.2 days) of higher metric routes being added based on ip address add/del and admin status. There are three proposals on how to resolve this: a) one that depends on the L3* states that goes around and marks every route as "inactive". What "inactive" means is still unclear; it could just be to add a blackhole route. Stefan and Krzysztof main proponents. b) one that treats oper status up/down no different than admin status up/down for kernel owned routes with oper status behavior constrained by a sysctl. Jamal and the route daemon folks main proponents. c) dont do anything - current behavior is good enough. Thomas main proponent. My suggestion to move forward is: i) Lets just stick to existing states in the RFC and no innovation of any sort. ii) Defer the discussion to what is done to L3 next. Can we agree on this? Issue-2) User space may be involved in kicking some of these state transitions. The issue is how to code so that you have no exposure to races from user space being preempted etc. I think this is resolvable once we agree on recommendation for #1 above. The main contention at the moment is between Thomas and Stefan - each has a different approach and we want one patch not 10. Suggestion to move forward: i) issue-1 resolved. ii) So if we can agree on 1, we can then talk on 2. Issue-2 can also be resolved if Stefan and Thomas agree privately and post a patch which we can all comment on. Thoughts? cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
