[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACP96tSn=E2nxPzJo_PPzgbrmS-YA1MVMenT8ufEVZNKk89ixQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:42:45 -0400
From: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini05@...il.com>
To: Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Bjornar Ness <bjornar.ness@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 1/2] net: allow user to set IPv6 nexthop for IPv4 route
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Andy Gospodarek
<gospo@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> + if (nla_len(nla) == 4) {
> + nexthop_nh->nh_gw = nla ? nla_get_be32(nla) : 0;
> + } else if (nla_len(nla) == 16) {
> + nla_memcpy(&nexthop_nh->nh_gw6, nla, nla_len(nla));
> + } else return -EINVAL;
would be better to use sizeof (in_addr_t) and sizeof (struct in6_addr)
for clarity? same applies for:
> + if (!ipv6_addr_any(&nh->nh_gw6) &&
> + nla_put(skb, RTA_GATEWAY, 16, &nh->nh_gw6))
> + goto nla_put_failure;
I havent read the MPBGP spec, but I'm also intrigued by how ND and NUD
will work in this model, since the packet that triggers each is not an
ipv6 packet.
--Sowmini
--
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