netdev - [RFC] IPv6 route replacement

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]

Date:	Wed, 22 Jul 2009 11:50:41 +0200
From:	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, pekkas@...core.fi, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
	kaber@...sh.net
Subject: [RFC] IPv6 route replacement

Hello guys.

I would like to hear your opinion on the following:

[root@f11 ~]# ip -6 route list 3ffe::1:1
[root@f11 ~]# ip -6 route add 3ffe::1:1 via fe80::20c:29ff:fe4c:3108 dev eth0 metric 1024
[root@f11 ~]# ip -6 route list 3ffe::1:1
3ffe::1:1 via fe80::20c:29ff:fe4c:3108 dev eth0  metric 1024  mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295
[root@f11 ~]# ip -6 route change 3ffe::1:1 via fe80::20c:29ff:fe4c:3108 dev eth0 metric 100
[root@f11 ~]# ip -6 route list 3ffe::1:1
3ffe::1:1 via fe80::20c:29ff:fe4c:3108 dev eth0  metric 100  mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295
3ffe::1:1 via fe80::20c:29ff:fe4c:3108 dev eth0  metric 1024  mtu 1500 advmss 1440 hoplimit 4294967295
[root@f11 ~]#

Now do you think this is the right behaviour? I would expect the first route to
be replaced. The same result is when you do "ip -6 route replace"

Thanks

Jirka
--
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