From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
Cc: <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: IPv6: the same address can be added multiple times
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:47:12 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15103.18224.265350.877968@pizda.ninka.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105132319120.3026-100000@netcore.fi>
In-Reply-To: <200105131759.VAA27768@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105132319120.3026-100000@netcore.fi>
Pekka Savola writes:
> But it still looks dirty. Also, it's easier to add it many times by
> mistake; IPv4 addresses do not allow this. And as you have to remove them
> N times too, this may create even more confusion.
There is this growing (think growing as in "fungus") set of thinking
that just because something can be misused, this is an argument
against it even existing.
I think this is wrong. I'm seeing it a lot, especially on this list,
and it's becomming a real concern at least to me.
Most of the time the argument goes like:
1: "Well, we allow this because you can do usefull things X Y and
Z as a result."
2: "Yeah, but this also lets you do stupid things like A B and
C."
translation: "It hurts when I do A B or C"
Most people know the appropriate response for the translation of
#2 ;-)
Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-05-14 2:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105031202080.13012-100000@netcore.fi>
2001-05-13 17:59 ` kuznet
2001-05-13 20:26 ` Pekka Savola
2001-05-14 10:48 ` David Woodhouse
2001-05-14 18:21 ` kuznet
2001-05-18 14:00 ` Pekka Savola
2001-05-14 2:47 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2001-05-14 7:42 ` Kai Henningsen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=15103.18224.265350.877968@pizda.ninka.net \
--to=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pekkas@netcore.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®