netdev - Re: [RFC] IPV6 address management

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]

Message-ID: <20090108134402.6e88438f@extreme>
Date:	Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:44:02 -0800
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] IPV6 address management

On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:58:30 -0800 (PST)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
> Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:12:20 -0800
> 
> > What about this?
> > 
> > If it works (still testing), I'll submit it.
> 
> So what is your plan?
> 
> Make the routing daemons depend upon the non-default
> behavior in order to act correctly?
routing daemons don't deal with addresses directly now,
and getting them to do it would be painful.

> Or is it to gradually get people to use the non-default
> (via distribution sysctl settings etc.) and eventually
> make it the default?
No plan to ever change the default. Just ship with sysctl.conf
setting.

> I disagree with both plans, and with that the facility
> is basically useless.
> 
> We absolutely have to live with the behavior we have now,
> and for a long time if not forever.


--
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