[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8cddkd-etc.ln1@banana.localnet>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 00:53:46 +0300
From: "Andrey Jr. Melnikov" <temnota.am@...il.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ipv6: put autoconf routes into per-interface tables
David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/17 8:30 AM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> > This patch adds a per-interface sysctl to have the kernel put
> > autoconf routes into different tables. This allows each interface
> > to have its own routing table if desired. Choosing the default
> > interface, or using different interfaces at the same time on a
> > per-socket or per-packet basis) can be done using policy routing
> > mechanisms that use as SO_BINDTODEVICE / IPV6_PKTINFO, mark-based
> > routing, or UID-based routing to select specific routing tables.
> Why not use the VRF capability then? create a VRF and assign the interface to it.
> End result is the same -- separate tables and the need to use a bind-to-device API to hit those routes.
Show *really working* config with VRF & IPv6?
In my tests - kernel unable to accept DAD, fill logs with "ICMPv6: RA: ndisc_router_discovery failed to add default route"
and nothing work. VRF interface don't contains IPv6 address.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists