In article [ref] (at Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:34:38 -0800 (PST)), "David S. Miller" [off-list ref] says:

I want to do this so that Patrick doesn't have to repost
13 or so patches every time one of the parts still under
discussion gets changed.

Actually, it seems the only part under discussion is how to
avoid extension header reparsing and routing re-lookups on
the ipv6 side.  That could be fixed by a follow-on patch and
is not %100 necessary for initial integration in my opinion.

Can I get agreement on that?  Patrick sends me a dump of the
current state of his patch set right now, we put that into
net-2.6.16, and fix problems with followon patches.

Ok?

I believe he can manage these patches in his tree,
but anyway...

Well, it is very important to fix the packet processing
path issues (including the extension header issue)
before we merge it to the mainline. Definitely.
What I want to ensure is that they will not reach the mainline
tree without resolving those issues.

Thank you.

--yoshfuji