From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?q?R=E9mi_Denis-Courmont?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optionaly validate RAs on raw sockets Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:19:11 +0300 Message-ID: <200707111919.11746@auguste.remlab.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Vlad Yasevich , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =?utf-8?q?=E5=90=89=E8=97=A4=E8=8B=B1=E6=98=8E?= To: David Stevens Return-path: Received: from poy.chewa.net ([194.242.114.73]:1541 "EHLO poy.chewa.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754818AbXGKQTQ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:19:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Le mercredi 11 juillet 2007, David Stevens a =E9crit : > That sounds like a good idea to me (FWIW), > though I also still think a simple raw-socket > application would do it just fine, possibly with > no kernel modification at all. > But since the kernel wouldn't be maintaining > the DNS info, which was my real objection to the > original version, netlink would work well too. One remaining corner case is NFS/IPv6 root, whereby userland won't have= =20 a chance to start before the network, and hence may miss the solicited=20 RA. Or would it? By default, the next unsolicited RA can be anytime=20 from now to after 10 minutes, so that's not sufficient. I wouldn't=20 personnaly care, but... --=20 R=E9mi Denis-Courmont http://www.remlab.net/