From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shirley Ma Subject: IPv6 MIB:ipv6PrefixTable implementation Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:21:38 -0800 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <200311191621.38087.mashirle@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: xma@us.ibm.com Return-path: To: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, netdev@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Hi, Alexy, A while ago, we had a discussion about IPv6 Prefix Table implementation. I agree with you it's not necessary to process offlink prefix. In each ipv6PrefixTable, there are 9 objects, which are Ifindex, Type, Prefix, Length, Origin(addrconf, manually, dhcp, others), OnLinkFlag, AutonomoueFlag, AdvPreferredLiftTime and ValidLifeTime. As we know, the routing table has all on-link prefix routes. But only Prefix, Length, Ifindex are saved in routing table, the rest objects info are not saved anywhere. One implementation detail question, do you think I need to save all the other Prefix Objects: Type, Origin(addrconf, manually, dhcp, others), OnLinkFlag, AutonomoueFlag, AdvPreferredLiftTime and ValidLifeTime in routing table also? If so, sounds like I add a big structure in each prefix route entry in the routing table. Thanks Shirley Ma IBM Linux Technology Center ======================= List: linux-netdev Subject: Re: [Issues] Implementation for IPv6 MIB:ipv6PrefixTable From: kuznet () ms2 ! inr ! ac ! ru Date: 2003-10-24 17:59:27 Hello! > First, do you think it's a good idea to save all prefix objects in routing > table? Those which are on-link, of course. > Second, where is the best location for the off-link prefix, on-link flag 0 > prefix to be saved? Do you really think off-link prefixes are to be saved? Prefix in use is onlink by defintion, so just return 1 in these bit and ignore off-link prefixes completely, they are meaningless, are not they? > Third, do you think it's a good idea to implement a prefix table/per > interface in the kernel? Well, if SNMP is going to be used as a tool to snoop ndisc promiscuously (which seems to be the case if it shows inforrmation about offlink prefixes), then it is definitely not a kernel task. Alexey