Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:00:12 -0400 From: Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org> To: "JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H" <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> Cc: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: IPv6 route mutex recursion (crash) and fix Message-ID: <20040924230011.GA1164@green.homeunix.org> In-Reply-To: <y7v1xgrjyt7.wl@ocean.jinmei.org> References: <20040922020957.GE84424@green.homeunix.org> <y7vu0tokekl.wl@ocean.jinmei.org> <20040923185841.GD959@green.homeunix.org> <y7v1xgrjyt7.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 03:40:04AM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H wrote: > (resending, since the first attempt seems to have failed due to some > DNS-related error) > > >>>>> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 14:58:41 -0400, > >>>>> Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org> said: > > >> So, as a result, I tend to think the proposed patch is a reasonable > >> fix to the problem. But please add the rationale as comments, since > >> the background intent is a bit vague as shown by the question from > >> George. > > > Thank you for your review. As you certainly are more knowledgable in KAME > > code than I am, would you mind redoing this so that the style is more > > closely matched; then I could take the change from the KAME repository? > > I'm willing to help you, but please let me check to be sure. Are you > asking me to modify the KAME snap code based on your patch first, > which you'll then merge back to FreeBSD? Yes, that is the way I would prefer things to be done, but either way is fine with me. -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040924230011.GA1164>