From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olaf Kirch Subject: Re: [RFC IPv6] Disabling IPv6 autoconf Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 13:10:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20060829111053.GL1201@suse.de> References: <20060829082435.GA2676@suse.de> <20060829.183426.52410264.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> <20060829.025400.37356422.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jbeulich@suse.de Return-path: Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:23694 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932304AbWH2LLE (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 07:11:04 -0400 To: Pekka Savola Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 01:55:28PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: > It's not obvious that IFF_MULTICAST is good enough. IMHO, you should > be able to run addrconf on non-multicast interfaces as well (e.g., > point-to-point interfaces, tunnels in particular). So would it work to use this? (flags & (IFF_MULTICAST|IFF_POINTOPOINT)) == 0 > It seems that current code already excludes IFF_NOARP interfaces > though. I looked at that - it doesn't help because it just disables DAD, but still does router solicitation, and I think it also sends a MLD listener report with the bogus link-layer address. I tend to agree that it's incorrect to assign an address at all in this case. Olaf -- Olaf Kirch | --- o --- Nous sommes du soleil we love when we play okir@suse.de | / | \ sol.dhoop.naytheet.ah kin.ir.samse.qurax