[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151014.060007.594576048227764026.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 06:00:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc: nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, dsa@...ulusnetworks.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5] net: ipv6: Make address flushing on ifdown
optional
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:14:05 +0200
> I can bring up the rp_filter setting, too. It currently gets
> unconditional set to strict mode in systemd on all interfaces.
Sigh...
> The question is, if we should care about people enabling forwarding by
> simply toggling the sysctl forwarding knob? Essentially in the kernel we
> could provide two sysctl knobs, one for forwarding and one for local
> reception. So people following the guidelines how to enable forwarding
> could automatically have rp_filter enabled while host mode does not
> because we leave the forwarding rp_filter setting enabled. This at the
> same time seems unnecessary complex and maybe we should simply talk to
> distributions. ;)
>
> What do you think?
We could make rp_filter only apply when something more than default and
subnet routes are configured. Another bypass might be when only one
interface other than loopback is up and enabled for ipv4.
--
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