Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/26] IPVS: Add first IPv6 support to IPVS.

From: Patrick McHardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 17:14:53 +0200

Julius Volz wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Simon Horman <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> I don't really have any concrete ideas about what a better
>> interface would look like. But I am more than happy to hash our ideas.
> 
> Good! At the moment I'm looking at various netlink docs and figuring
> out how things generally work. I think netlink probably adds a lot of
> complexity over the previous sockopt interface, but I hope it's worth
> it.
> 
> As for compatibility and extensibility, how is that best achieved with
> netlink? I've seen some examples copy whole C structs into netlink
> datagrams, but that is obviously what we don't want anymore. So the
> way to go seems to be to transfer each struct field as a separate
> netlink attribute, right?

Yes. You can also group those which belong together logically
in nested attributes.