[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20071116.034416.19410547.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 03:44:16 +0900 (JST)
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
To: Fred.L.Templin@...ing.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, vladislav.yasevich@...com,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/01] ipv6: RFC4214 Support (v2.2)
In article <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1029EDC31@...-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com> (at Thu, 15 Nov 2007 10:11:16 -0800), "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@...ing.com> says:
> Yoshifuji,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 [mailto:yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 3:48 AM
> > To: Templin, Fred L
> > Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; vladislav.yasevich@...com;
> > yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/01] ipv6: RFC4214 Support (v2.2)
> >
> > In article
> > <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1029EDC2B@...-NW-7V2.nw.nos.bo
> > eing.com> (at Wed, 14 Nov 2007 22:44:17 -0800), "Templin,
> > Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@...ing.com> says:
> >
> > > From: Fred L. Templin <fred.l.templin@...ing.com>
> > >
> > > This patch includes support for the Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel
> > > Addressing Protocol (ISATAP) per RFC4214. It uses the SIT
> > > module, and is configured using extensions to the "iproute2"
> > > utility.
> > >
> > > The following diffs are specific to the Linux 2.6.24-rc2 kernel
> > > distribution. This message includes the full and patchable
> > diff text;
> > > please use this version to apply patches.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Fred L. Templin <fred.l.templin@...ing.com>
> >
> > BTW, how will we handle DNS name (and TTL) and/or multiple PRL entries
> > in RFC4214?
> >
> > I'm doubting if we really need to handle PRL refresh in kernel.
>
> DNS name and PRL refresh are done in a daemon that either exec's
> 'ip' or issues the device ioctl's directly. When there are multiple default
> router IPv4 addresses, the daemon picks one as the primary and writes
> it to the kernel. It can then change to a different primary later if it wants
> to. Also possible is something like VRRP to allow several routers for
> fault tolerance even though there is only a single default router address.
Why? All PRLs should be installed in kernel so that standard router
selection can be used. For this, I think we should have just one
isatap interface per set of PRLs provideing virtual link,
especially if each of them provides the same prefix.
--yoshfuji
-
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