[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E9C9ED6.9080601@hp.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:32:06 -0400
From: Brian Haley <brian.haley@...com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>
CC: maze@...gle.com, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ipv6: Allow netlink to set IPv6 address scope
On 10/16/2011 10:26 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> RFC 3879 deprecated site-local addresses because the were non-unique and thus
> ambiguous, and if they leak, they cause problems. This is not an issue
> in the use
> case I presented, because the addresses are syntactically global
> addresses - they
> just don't have global reachability.
Not very global then :(
>> The MIF problem statement (in the RFC editor's queue) talks about this problem,
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mif-problem-statement-15 - perhaps it's
>> better to work there to develop a more generic solution (using DHCPv6, RA
>> options, etc) before making this change?
>
> I don't think it's a good idea. Waiting for an IETF working group to
> produce a standard
> when it doesn't even have a problem statement finalized could take years.
It would be useful to give some input there, even if the Linux-specific
implementation of any standard plays with bits in the ifaddr.
> Is there another reason why we shouldn't enable userspace to do what it wants?
In my opinion it just feels like a hack, because things won't work when your
wifi attaches to a walled garden, or there's a third interface - who wins the
tiebreaker?
I do see your point that it will help with the problem you're trying to solve,
hopefully someone else will offer their opinion.
-Brian
--
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