Hi Andrew,

>> I do wonder why you'd cancel the command from the handler?
> 
> In the IWD AP case I want to cancel a dump command which I think is
> already handled correctly, but if the API can be made more robust then
> I think it's an improvement.  There can be complicated code paths
> where you destroy an object that owns the netlink command as a result
> of the command response.

Sure, I buy the more robust argument, though I still wonder how one would even 
get into such a state on purpose.  But the last sentence seems to be handwaving? 
  So did you somehow trigger this condition or just fixing ghost bugs?

Regards,
-Denis