[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJFZqHxB8PscqXnX9oxpHf8zFyW1hyCZVZTn_=DoKebN3X2ZGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:21:12 +0800
From: RongQing Li <roy.qing.li@...il.com>
To: Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: clear RTF_EXPIRES when call ip6_rt_copy
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 09:58 AM, RongQing Li wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/17/2013 09:48 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 03:46:24PM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
>>>>> The from of new cloned rt should not be set if it's impossible for the ort
>>>>> to be expired.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, why do you think so? What could go wrong?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I just don't want rt6_check_expired to check some impossible expired routes.
>>>
>>
>> What is wrong if we set from for new cloned rt by checking if ort has
>> RTF_EXPIRES flag?
>
>
> The RTF_EXPIRES flag may be changed by router advertisment package,
> the ort may become expired after you hadn't set from for new cloned rt.
>
> we should set from even this kind of ort doesn't have RTF_EXPIRES flag.
Thanks;
Do we want to set from only from RA route? if so, we should check
ort with RTF_ADDRCONF|RTF_DEFAULT, or RTF_ADDRCONF | RTF_ROUTEINFO,
like in rt6_fill_node
else if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_ADDRCONF) {
if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
else
rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL;
}
-R
--
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