netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] bridge: leave carrier on for empty bridge

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:30:41 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	Ang Way Chuang <wcang@....wide.ad.jp>
Cc:	Nicolas de Pesloüan 
	<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Achmad Basuki <abazh@....wide.ad.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bridge: leave carrier on for empty bridge

On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 11:15:41 +0900
Ang Way Chuang <wcang@....wide.ad.jp> wrote:

> A more ideal solution in this case is to add the option to enabling carrier on sysfs and modify libvirtd
> to turn on the carrier if IPv6 is enabled. But it will still break the existing configuration until everyone
> upgrade to the latest libvirtd and kernel. Since there is no other complain from other user with this setup,
> I guess nobody actually assigns IPv6 to libvirtd network device at this moment (partly because virt-manager
> doesn't expose that functionality yet??).

Not sure about adding an option to support a configuration that is only available
by manually editing the xml files. There can't be that many people using libvirt in
this way, and fixing libvirt seems like a better solution.

Rather than rush in a kludge to handle this, let's take a few days and
examine what libvirt is trying to do and how it is doing it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html