Re: RFC: IPSEC patch 0 for netlink events
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: 2005-03-27 08:18:48
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: 2005-03-27 08:18:48
On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 03:11:15PM -0500, jamal wrote:
On Sat, 2005-03-26 at 14:47, Herbert Xu wrote:quoted
Since we're adding new multicast groups, what about adding one for the passive event monitor? That way we can return ESRCH in km_query if there are no registered ACQUIRE listeners but still send messages to the monitor.Not sure how to do it for both PF_KEY and netlink. It does sound like a reasonable thing to do. Thoughts?
For non-standard extensions like this I wouldn't worry about PF_KEY. After all, if you're going to make sense of all the messages from the kernel you'll have to use netlink anyway. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} [off-list ref] Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt