[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc855311-f348-430b-0d3c-9103d4fdbbb6@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 22:16:41 -0700
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Maciej Żenczykowski <zenczykowski@...il.com>
Cc: Praveen Chaudhary <praveen5582@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, corbet@....net,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Hideaki Yoshifuji <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Zhenggen Xu <zxu@...kedin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 1/1] Allow user to set metric on default route
learned via Router Advertisement.
On 1/22/21 9:02 PM, Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:
> Why can't we get rid of the special case for 0 and simply make 1024 the
> default value?
That would work too.
>
> As for making it an RA option: it's not clear how that would work, the
> use case I see for this is for example two connections to the internet,
> of which one is clearly better (higher throughput, lower latency, lower
> packet loss, etc) then the other.
>
> The upstream routers would have to somehow coordinate with each other
> the metric values... that seems impossible to achieve in practice -
> unless they do something like report expected down/up
> bandwidth, latency, etc... While some sort of policy on the machine
> itself seems much more feasible (for example wired interface > wireless
> interface > cell interface or something like that)
I was thinking the admin of the network controls the RAs and knows which
paths are preferred over the admin of the node receiving the RA (not
practical for a mobile setup with cell vs wifi, but is for a DC which is
the driving use case).
But it takes an extension to IPv6/ndisc to add metric as an RA option,
so not realistic in a reasonable time frame.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists