Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:10:44 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] IPv4: enable use of 240/4 address space
This short patch modifies the IPv4 networking to enable use of the
240.0.0.0/4 (aka class-E) address space as propsed in the internet
draft draft-fuller-240space-00
broadcast address
(vs subnet broadcast address, which can be forwarded by routers).
From 84bccef295aa9754ee662191e32ba1d64edce2ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:10:44 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] IPv4: enable use of 240/4 address space
This short
use of 240/4 address space
This short patch modifies the IPv4 networking to enable use of the
240.0.0.0/4 (aka class-E) address space as propsed in the internet
draft draft-fuller-240space-00.txt.
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Acked-by: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Jan 7 2008 17:10, Vince Fuller wrote:
This set of diffs modify the 2.6.20 kernel to enable use of the 240/4
(aka class-E) address space as consistent with the Internet Draft
draft-fuller-240space-00.txt.
Below is a patch against davem/net-2.6.25. It might look very spartan,
but that is
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:13:52 +0100 (CET)), Jan
Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
diff --git a/include/linux/in.h b/include/linux/in.h
index 27d8a5a..b01bf75 100644
--- a/include/linux/in.h
+++ b/include/linux/in.h
@@ -216,9 +216,6 @@ struct sockaddr_in {
On Jan 18 2008 10:26, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
-#define IN_EXPERIMENTAL(a) long int) (a)) 0xf000) ==
0xf000)
-#define IN_BADCLASS(a) IN_EXPERIMENTAL((a))
No, please keep these macros.
@@ -264,7 +261,7 @@ static inline bool
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:52:08 +0100 (CET)), Jan
Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
On Jan 18 2008 10:26, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
-#define IN_EXPERIMENTAL(a) long int) (a)) 0xf000) ==
0xf000)
-#define IN_BADCLASS(a)
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:13:19 +0900 (JST)),
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
Assuming IN_BADCLASS() is still there, we should not reuse the name
of ipv6_is_badclass because the their meanings are different.
Again, ipv4_is_badclass()
My hands
