[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1185298111.17202.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:28:31 -0700
From: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
Cc: Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>,
Linux Network Development list <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: specifying scopid's for link-local IPv6 addrs
On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 10:13 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
> > Rick,
> >
> > I don't see any way around this. For example, on one of my test
> > systems, I have the following link local routes:
> >
> > chance% netstat -A inet6 -rn | grep fe80::/64
> > fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 eth0
> > fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 eth2
> > fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 eth3
> > fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 eth4
> > fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 eth5
> > fe80::/64 :: U 256 0 0 eth6
> >
> > So if I want to run a link local test to fe80::202:b3ff:fed4:cd1,
> > the system has no way to choose which is the correct interface to
> > use for the test, and will give an error if the interface isn't
> > specified.
>
> Yeah, I was wondering about that. I'm not sure if the attempts on "those other
> OSes" happened to involve multiple interfaces or not. Even so, it "feels"
> unpleasant for an application to deal with and I wonder if there is a way for a
> stack to deal with it on the application's behalf. I guess that might involve
> some sort of layer violation between neightbor discovery and routing (typing
> while I think about things I know little about...)
>
> Is there RFC chapter and verse I might read about routing with multiple
> link-local's on a system?
>
> > You must explicitly specify the desired interface. For example,
> > on my test system, the correct interface is eth6 which is interface 8
> > (lo eth0 eth1 eth2 ... eth5 eth6). Here is an example nuttcp test
> > specifying interface 8:
> >
> > chance% nuttcp -P5100 fe80::202:b3ff:fed4:cd1%8
> > 1178.5809 MB / 10.02 sec = 986.2728 Mbps 12 %TX 15 %RX
> >
> > nuttcp uses getaddrinfo() which parses the "%<ifindex>" field,
> > and then copies the sin6_scope_id from the res structure to the
> > server's sockaddr_in6 structure before initiating the connect().
>
> OK, I'll give that a quick try with netperf:
>
> [root@...pc106 ~]# netperf -H 192.168.2.107 -c -C -i 30,3 -- -s 1M -S 1M -m 64K
> -H fe80::207:43ff:fe05:9d%2
We can even specify the interface name instead of the interface index
<link-local>%ethX
getaddrinfo() uses if_nametoindex() internally to get the index.
Thanks
Sridhar
> TCP STREAM TEST from ::0 (::) port 0 AF_INET6 to fe80::207:43ff:fe05:9d%2
> (fe80::207:43ff:fe05:9d) port 0 AF_INET6 : +/-2.5% @ 99% conf.
>
> Cool - it establishes the data connection just fine.
>
>
> To further demonstrate my ignorance :) is that %n suffix something one might
> expect in most/all getaddrinfo()'s or is that unique to the one in Linux?
>
> rick jones
> -
> 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
-
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists