From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cosmin Ratiu Subject: Re: [PATCH] make TLLAO option for NA packets configurable Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 19:43:44 +0300 Message-ID: <200910011943.44625.cratiu@ixiacom.com> References: <200910011916.40908.cratiu@ixiacom.com> <20091001092100.14ea024b@s6510> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Octavian Purdila To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from ixro-out-rtc.ixiacom.com ([92.87.192.98]:4908 "EHLO ixro-ex1.ixiacom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754271AbZJAQnl (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 12:43:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20091001092100.14ea024b@s6510> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 01 October 2009 19:21:00 Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Thu, 1 Oct 2009 19:16:40 +0300 > > Cosmin Ratiu wrote: > > Hello, > > > > This is a patch that adds a sysctl to control the sending of the Target > > Link Layer Address Option (TLLAO) with Neighbor Advertisements responding > > to unicast NS. The patch was made for kernel 2.6.7 (yes it is ancient), > > but the code is similar with the current kernel and I can rework it if > > you want it in. > > > > RFC 2461, page 24 suggests that this option should be included with NAs > > to avoid a race with the sender clearing its cache after sending an > > unicast NS, but before receiving a NA. > > > > It seems there are some Juniper routers (MX series) that expect this > > option to be included with all NAs. > > > > Another solution is to always send this option, as it has little > > overhead. > > > > Please let me know what you think, > > Cosmin. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cosmin Ratiu > > --- //packages/linux_2.6.7/main/src/include/linux/sysctl.h > > +++ /home/z/w1/packages/linux_2.6.7/main/src/include/linux/sysctl.h > > @@ -444,6 +444,7 @@ > > NET_IPV6_IP6FRAG_TIME=23, > > NET_IPV6_IP6FRAG_SECRET_INTERVAL=24, > > NET_IPV6_MLD_MAX_MSF=25, > > + NET_IPV6_NDISC_FORCE_TLLAO=26, > > Since numbered sysctl values are deprecated, can you use CTL_UNNUMBERED > to avoid having to add yet another value? Of course, but that is a detail. If you decide on the sysctl solution, I'll do it. If you decide on making this the default behavior, it's even better. Cosmin.