[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131009014324.GA24368@order.stressinduktion.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 03:43:24 +0200
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Duan Jiong <duanj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] ipv6: Do route updating for redirect in ndisc layer
Hi Duan!
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:13:37AM +0200, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> Especially because redirects also help in the on-link determination (same
> RFC, section 8), I changed my mind and am still in favour of updating it
> in the ndisc layer. In my opinion we just have to consider all routing
> tables and apply the update to every one which carries a valid next hop
> to the source of the redirect (under consideration of the destination).
>
> This will be important if we actually try to get linux to correctly
> implement the ipv6 subnet model (RFC 5942, Section 4 Rule 1). In that
> case we are not allowed to assume nodes on-link even if they would match
> the same prefix as a locally configured address.
I am playing around with a simple patch which does suppress adding routing
information for the on-link assumption we currently do in linux.
Are you intereseted in following up on this? I still do think we should update
not only the routing table the socket uses but all routing tables which have a
valid route towards the router which emitted the redirect.
I try to check if we actually handle redirect messages when ECMP routes are in
use correctly.
Greetings,
Hannes
--
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