From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Joe Harvell <joe.harvell@tekcomms.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iproute2: enhance addr label validation
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:43:03 -0500
Message-ID: <55103487.5070903@tekcomms.com>
References: <550DD13D.90009@tekcomms.com>
 <20150323011522.GB20755@vergenet.net> <55101D07.6090301@tekcomms.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Stephen Hemminger <shemming@brocade.com>,
	Vadim Kochan <vadim4j@gmail.com>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-by2on0141.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.100.141]:4309
	"EHLO na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752230AbbCWPok (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 23 Mar 2015 11:44:40 -0400
In-Reply-To: <55101D07.6090301@tekcomms.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 03:14:53PM -0500, Joe Harvell wrote:
>>> The ip addr command today rejects address labels that would break
>>> ifconfig.  However, it allows some labels which still break it. Enhance
>>> enforcement to reject all known incompatible labels, and allow the
>>> existing -force option to allow someone to use a label even if it is 
>>> not
>>> ifconfig compatible
>> I am concerned this will break existing users who are relying on setting
>> labels that would now be rejected without using -force.
>>
> [snip]
>
> Simon,
>
> Good point.  I propose the following:
>
> When a label is specified without -force, and that label begins with 
> the interface
> name but is followed by something other than a colon, accept the label 
> but emit
> a warning message indicating this label is incompatible with ifconfig 
> and that later
> versions of the 'ip address' command may reject it.  This message can 
> also indicate
> that -force can be specified to explicitly indicate a label that is 
> non ifconfig compatible
> is desired.
>
> At some point in the future, the behavior could then be changed to 
> reject such labels.
>
> What do you think?
>
> ---
> Joe
Ok, I made the changes I propose above, and have pushed them to 
'git@github.com:jharvell/iproute2.git addr-label-noncompat'
with a new signoff commit (303f46819883d4c808974629a6d3515102c5c0d0) 
that summarizes all the changes from master.
But I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do with respect to the patch in 
patchwork to designate that I want the new code
to be merged instead of before the change.  Do I reject this patch 
request and submit another one?  Do I send an email
with the same subject as this one with the new patch against master?

Thanks.
---
Joe