On Sun, 2002-10-20 at 14:24, Bojan Smojver wrote: > Sorry to be a pest (no, not really :-)... > > Would this patch have more chance if it didn't involve an MMN bump? If > so, let me know and I'll rework it...
>From your description of the patch, I'm +1 on the concept (though I haven't had time to read the code itself). As for the MMN bump, IMHO it would be better to code the patch in a way that doesn't require it (if I remember correctly, you had an alternate solution involving a module-specific structure instead of new fields in conn_rec). That would make it easier to get the improved bytes-sent accounting into the hands of users who need it, without having to wait until 2.1 or 2.2. Brian
