[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30fe1fa984e52f4cca318e54f9d97a21@chewa.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:59:58 +0200
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi@...lab.net>
To: Michal Humpula <michal.humpula@...rydum.cz>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: nonlocal_bind & IPv6
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:43:45 +0200, Michal Humpula
<michal.humpula@...rydum.cz> wrote:
> I was just wondering, what's wrong with this?
It's not in unified format :D
> *** linux-2.6.34/net/ipv6/af_inet6.c 2010-05-16 23:17:36.000000000
> +0200
> --- linux-2.6.34-hack/net/ipv6/af_inet6.c 2010-06-25
> 19:50:19.000000000 +0200
> ***************
> *** 345,354 ****
> --- 345,356 ----
> if (!(addr_type & IPV6_ADDR_MULTICAST)) {
> if (!ipv6_chk_addr(net, &addr->sin6_addr,
> dev, 0)) {
> + if (!sysctl_ip_nonlocal_bind) {
> err = -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> }
> + }
> rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> }
>
> Motivation: just want to balance one IPv6 address between two nodes with
> the help of keepalived the same way I do it with IPv4 without the need
> of restarting the daemons binding on that IP.
nonlocal_bind seems a bit 80's to me. Why don't you bind the daemon to
[::]? If it needs to know its own address, it can always use getsockname()
for connected sockets and IPV6_PKTINFO ancillary data for datagram sockets.
--
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://www.remlab.net
http://fi.linkedin.com/in/remidenis
--
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