From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH] [NET]: Fix deletion of local addresses only varying in prefix length Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 02:20:49 +0100 Message-ID: <20050305012049.GL31837@postel.suug.ch> References: <20050304012003.GA31837@postel.suug.ch> <20050304131419.GE31837@postel.suug.ch> <20050304233212.GA27421@gondor.apana.org.au> <20050305002910.GJ31837@postel.suug.ch> <42290172.7020403@trash.net> <20050305010319.GB27804@gondor.apana.org.au> <42290738.6050605@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Herbert Xu , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com To: Patrick McHardy Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42290738.6050605@trash.net> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * Patrick McHardy <42290738.6050605@trash.net> 2005-03-05 02:11 > Herbert Xu wrote: > >On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 01:46:42AM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > > > >>I think that would be ok. Unrelated to this: for IFA_ADDRESS we don't > >>do an exact match, perhaps we should also do this for IFA_LOCAL for > >>consistency. > > > > > >You mean that we do do an exact match for IFA_ADDRESS? > > No, I meant that IFA_ADDRESS matches on exact prefixlen, but uses > inet_ifa_match() for comparing the addresses. In any case we should > keep the behaviour that no given prefix is a wildcard, but if a > prefix is given we could do something similar as for IFA_ADDRESS. This will change the behaviour and makes my work completely useless. Assuming one adds 1.1.1.1/24, 1.1.1.2/24 and then deletes 1.1.1.2/24 one would expect 1.1.1.2/24 to be deleted but that wouldn't be the case.