[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180501132048.GA15048@splinter.mtl.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 16:20:48 +0300
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Winter <Thomas.Winter@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: Allow non-gateway ECMP for IPv6
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 08:59:10PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 4/30/18 3:15 PM, Thomas Winter wrote:
> > It is valid to have static routes where the nexthop
> > is an interface not an address such as tunnels.
> > For IPv4 it was possible to use ECMP on these routes
> > but not for IPv6.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Winter <Thomas.Winter@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
> > Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
> > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
> > Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>
> > Cc: Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
> > ---
> > include/net/ip6_route.h | 3 +--
> > net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c | 3 ---
> > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
>
> Interesting. Existing code inserts the dev nexthop as a separate route.
>
> Change looks good to me.
>
> Acked-by: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Thanks for the Cc, David. I'll need to adjust mlxsw to support this.
Specifically, mlxsw_sp_fib6_rt_can_mp().
BTW, I hit this bug while looking into this:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/907050/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists