[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080328.120622.73826877.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:06:22 +0900 (JST)
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
To: benoit.boissinot@...-lyon.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, pekkas@...core.fi, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1 of 5] IPv6: do not wrap around when the lifetime has
expired
In article <20080327193854.GC8574@...-lyon.fr> (at Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:38:54 +0100), Benoit Boissinot <benoit.boissinot@...-lyon.org> says:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 03:25:39AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
> > In article <dd125a7f86968371046d.1206305169@...zuine> (at Sun, 23 Mar 2008 21:46:09 +0100), Benoit Boissinot <benoit.boissinot@...-lyon.org> says:
> >
> > > IPv6: do not wrap around when the lifetime has expired
> > >
> > > Instead of reporting overly large lifetimes to userspace,
> > > report a lifetime of 0 when a lifetime has expired.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Benoit Boissinot <benoit.boissinot@...-lyon.org>
> >
> > NAK.
> >
> > (signed) lifetime < 0 means it has expired, but 0 does not mean
> > that the lifetime has expired, but it is being expired
> > (within 1 second).
>
> It makes sense, so is the output of ip addr correct ?
>
> inet6 2a01:5d8:58a0:ebfc:b5fb:88a3:27a5:ce96/64 scope global secondary deprecated dynamic
> valid_lft 84064sec preferred_lft 4294964960sec
>
> Can iproute2 be "fixed" ? or is it the expected output ?
Please fix iproute2.
--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