From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Layton Subject: Re: [cifs bindaddr v2] cifs: Allow binding to local IP address. Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:07:51 -0400 Message-ID: <20100826210751.505d89ce@corrin.poochiereds.net> References: <1282844096-13295-1-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com> <20100826155733.6eccc377@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ben Greear , sfrench-eUNUBHrolfbYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Steve French Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:36:54 -0500 Steve French wrote: > There are clearly valid reasons for being able to select outgoing > interface - I wouldn't mind doing this using IPv6 address format if > that is more natural (since that can include ipv4 addresses) - or > distinct ipv4/ipv6 > The patch already uses cifs_convert_address which handles IPv4 or IPv6 addresses just fine. I don't think it would be that difficult to optionally store a v4 or v6 address to bind socket. You'll also need to think about what this means for ip address selection in the mount helper. It'll need to be modified to make sure that the address families between the two match. What happens if someone specifies and IPv4 bindaddr, and the host in the UNC resolves to an IPv6 address? -- Jeff Layton