From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cong Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v10 10/11] vxlan: respect scope_id for ll addr Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 16:10:50 +0800 Message-ID: <1377850250.2591.8.camel@cr0> References: <1377667379-2315-1-git-send-email-amwang@redhat.com> <1377667379-2315-11-git-send-email-amwang@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: David Stevens Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:17500 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754387Ab3H3IK7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Aug 2013 04:10:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2013-08-29 at 17:20 -0400, David Stevens wrote: > netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org wrote on 08/28/2013 01:22:58 AM: > > > From: Cong Wang > > > As pointed out by David, we should take care of scope id for ll > > addr, and use it for route lookup. > > It is an error to have a zero scope_id for an LL addr, but > this code is not correct, because it only honors scope_id for > LL addrs. Multicast addresses also require scope_id be set. > This shouldn't be in the transmit path. The netlink code > that sets it should require it be nonzero for LL addrs and multicast > addrs when it is set, and the transmit path should *always* use scope_id, > whether for an lladdr or not, whether scope_id is zero or not. > Except multicast address, I think this is what I did in some version before? It is you who told me to respect scope id on tx path for routing... I am really tired of changing it back again and again... I will drop this patch and let you fix it by yourself later. Thanks!