This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Added missing ICMPv6 flags and option
- From: Dan LÃdtke <maildanrl at gmail dot com>
- To: myllynen at redhat dot com
- Cc: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Dan Luedtke <danrl at danrl dot de>
- Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 16:38:14 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Added missing ICMPv6 flags and option
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1392230153-23499-1-git-send-email-danrl at danrl dot de> <52FBC7DD dot 8020309 at redhat dot com> <CAAfuxnK0eAA1mA_fxhO4Oz9hWiV4yJ6FrZOGDC4j+1uv0OXHFQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <52FBD8BC dot 4020805 at redhat dot com> <52FBDEFE dot 9050302 at redhat dot com> <52FBE440 dot 2090705 at redhat dot com> <CAAfuxnKo0xi8FFAjt15TR=DWRX7=xoqEewNih_UwEQt=eYnxBw at mail dot gmail dot com> <52FBEB30 dot 1020403 at redhat dot com> <52FC7AD6 dot 6070905 at redhat dot com>
Do we all agree on this patch? Is it ready for being commited by a
commiter or do I have to make further changes?
Have a nice weekend!
Dan
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Marko Myllynen <myllynen@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2014-02-12 23:44, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On 02/12/2014 04:30 PM, Dan LÃdtke wrote:
>>
>>>> Would a sensible person reading the RFCs come up with the same constant names?
>>> I consider myself sensible and I read a lot of IPv6-related RFCs :)
>>> So, yes, given that there are no constants in the RFC. First come,
>>> first define? It is a bit of a mess at the moment when writing
>>> portable IPv6 software right now.
>>> For example, this one always gives me a headache and needs custom
>>> defines to work around:
>>> glibc:
>>> #define ND_RA_FLAG_HOME_AGENT 0x20
>>>
>>> BSD(?):
>>> #define ND_RA_FLAG_HA 0x20
>>
>> In that case we want both defines like this:
>>
>> #define ND_RA_FLAG_HOME_AGENT 0x20
>> /* For compatibility with BSD. */
>> #define ND_RA_FLAG_HA ND_RA_FLAG_HOME_AGENT
>>
>> I prefer the more verbose "HOME_AGENT."
>
> FWIW, when this and other Mobile IPv6 related defines and structures
> were added, I can't honestly remember did I check BSDs for reference or
> not. But looking at this now, seems that FreeBSD added ND_RA_FLAG_HA
> roughly a year after glibc added ND_RA_FLAG_HOME_AGENT, NetBSD added
> ND_RA_FLAG_HOME_AGENT few years after glibc, and OpenBSD still don't
> have either of them. The KAME project was working on the BSD code so not
> sure how FreeBSD and NetBSD ended up with different defines.
>
> Anyway, I recall that the aim was to be as consistent as feasible both
> with other icmp6.h definitions and the terminology used in the related
> drafts and RFCs.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Marko Myllynen
--
Dan Luedtke
http://www.danrl.de