netdev - net.ipv6.conf.INT.accept_ra_rt_info_max

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.0902030632240.7583@netcore.fi>
Date:	Tue, 3 Feb 2009 06:38:49 +0200 (EET)
From:	Pekka Savola <pekkas@...core.fi>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
cc:	Teran McKinney <sega01@...il.com>
Subject: net.ipv6.conf.INT.accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen defaults to 0

Hello,

As reported and discussed below and in 
<http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-ipv6@lists.debian.org/msg03753.html>, 
to accept "route information option" on Linux, you have to manually 
change accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen sysctl value.  Other implementations 
that I know of accept this by default.

Is it intentional that Route Information options are ignored by 
default?

I suspect not -- if so, the default value should be (IMHO) 64 or if 
that's disagreeable, 48.

Even if this is intentional, I think the intentions should be 
revisited.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 17:24:00 +0000
From: Teran McKinney <sega01@...il.com>
Reply-To: radvd Development Discussion <radvd-devel-l@...ech.org>
To: radvd Development Discussion <radvd-devel-l@...ech.org>
Subject: Re: [radvd-devel-l] Linux and specific routes

Hey,

I have finally obtained my answer. I ended up reading RFC 4191,
glancing at RFC 2461, and looking at Linux's source code, but found
what I was looking for. It turns out that "route information option"
is more precise than "specific routes", so I googled for it and found
that Linux supports it just fine; all you have to do is set
accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen to the maximum prefix length you want to
accept. <http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-ipv6@lists.debian.org/msg03753.html>
is very helpful.

Cheers and thanks,
Teran

On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 18:27, Arnaud Ebalard <arnaud.ebalard@...s.net> wrote:
>
> "Teran McKinney" <sega01@...il.com> writes:
>
>> I added the patch, but it does not seem to affect specific routes. I
>> was only using one router at first, but tried with an additional
>> router and had no luck. Specific routes just aren't been added :-(.
>> This configuration seems to work fine if manually added, so I'm not
>> sure what is wrong.
>
> If you compiled the kernel with the support and enabled the /proc
> entries to activate the feature, then it looks like a bug. Maybe you
> could drop a mail to the author of the patch.
>
> Cheers,
>
> a+
>
> --
> radvd-devel-l mailing list  :  radvd-devel-l@...ech.org
> http://lists.litech.org/listinfo/radvd-devel-l
>

-- 
radvd-devel-l mailing list  :  radvd-devel-l@...ech.org
http://lists.litech.org/listinfo/radvd-devel-l
--
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