Re: Netlink connector

[Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>]

On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 11:33:51PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:

> Netlink is transport protocol - no need to add complexity into it, 
> it must be as simple as possible and thus extensible.

yes.  but when you run into a serious addressing shortage (like the
internet does with ipv4), you develop something that provides more
addresses (such as ipv6).  That's why support for more groups than 32
(per family) is something that should be put in the netlink protocol.

I totally agree that we need a higher-level api on top of that, in order
to hide the details of the networking stack for those not interested in
it.

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>                 http://netfilter.org/
============================================================================
  "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
   architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going
   on while IP was being designed."                    -- Paul Vixie

Attachment: pgpHmynuIZHYS.pgp
Description: PGP signature