[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC 5006 status

To: Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC 5006 status
From: RÃmi Denis-Courmont <remi@remlab.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:26:39 +0100
Cc: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops@u-1.phicoh.com>, Gert Doering <gert@space.net>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <20100318205249.GF29515@pirzuine>
Organization: Remlab.net
References: <C7C67F1D.37A5F%alain_durand@cable.comcast.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1003180441110.9819@uplift.swm.pp.se> <m1NsBT1-0001bWC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20100318090413.GE69383@Space.Net> <m1NsCBb-0001blC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <40f323d01003180356m77c9bc9ch3308ee14c47bd495@mail.gmail.com> <55ad5ed558fb34e580521f461d21c543@chewa.net> <20100318205249.GF29515@pirzuine>
User-agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.1

On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:52:49 +0100, Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@gmail.com>

wrote:

>> As one of the co-author of rdnssd, I can assure you that this is

>> incorrect.

>> rdnssd gets the RDNSS information from the Linux kernel via NetLink out

>> of the kernel SLAAC code.

> 

> I should have been clearer. There's indeed a forwarding, but no

> processing of the DNS information happens in the kernel.



Parsing the packet is done in kernel. But it's not nearly as arguable as

retaining extra state in the kernel.



-- 

RÃmi Denis-Courmont

http://www.remlab.net

http://fi.linkedin.com/in/remidenis

References:
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: "Durand, Alain" <alain_durand@cable.comcast.com>
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops@u-1.phicoh.com>
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops@u-1.phicoh.com>
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@gmail.com>
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: RÃmi Denis-Courmont <remi@remlab.net>
- Re: RFC 5006 status
  - From: Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: RFC 5006 status
Next by Date: Overloading RA [Re: RFC 5006 status]
Previous by thread: Re: RFC 5006 status
Next by thread: Re: RFC 5006 status
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread