[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALe+Z01M7RktfbNvR3rcUC_EMGN2zEjNOHScgo8B-bNrActFrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 18:36:01 +0200
From: Jan Blunck <jblunck@...radead.org>
To: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, davem@...emloft.net,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>, jmorris@...ei.org,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
fubar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: no addrconf for slave devices
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 6:14 PM, David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> On 10/16/15 10:12 AM, Jan Blunck wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/16/15 9:57 AM, Jan Blunck wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that enslaved ports should get network layer addresses.
>>>> This is one example with a team device:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> for VRF devices we do want the enslaved links to have link local
>>> addresses.
>>>
>>
>> That is interesting. As far I can see you are setting IFF_SLAVE in
>> do_vrf_add_slave() and therefore already stop IPv6 addrconf.
>>
>
> Check net-next. That had to be removed to get IPv6 working.
>
Thanks for the pointer.
So it would be better to differentiate between L2 and L3 ports and
only start addrconf on later ones? I don't think there is a flag that
allows for that though.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists