From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benoit Boissinot Subject: Re: [PATCH 1 of 5] IPv6: do not wrap around when the lifetime has expired Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:38:54 +0100 Message-ID: <20080327193854.GC8574@ens-lyon.fr> References: <20080328.032539.66693379.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, pekkas@netcore.fi To: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =?utf-8?B?5ZCJ6Jek6Iux5piO?= Return-path: Received: from pilet.ens-lyon.fr ([140.77.167.16]:44155 "EHLO pilet.ens-lyon.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757222AbYC0Ti6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:38:58 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080328.032539.66693379.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 03:25:39AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =E5=90=89= =E8=97=A4=E8=8B=B1=E6=98=8E wrote: > In article (at Sun, 23 Mar= 2008 21:46:09 +0100), Benoit Boissinot = says: >=20 > > IPv6: do not wrap around when the lifetime has expired > >=20 > > Instead of reporting overly large lifetimes to userspace, > > report a lifetime of 0 when a lifetime has expired. > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Benoit Boissinot >=20 > NAK. >=20 > (signed) lifetime < 0 means it has expired, but 0 does not mean > that the lifetime has expired, but it is being expired > (within 1 second). It makes sense, so is the output of ip addr correct ? inet6 2a01:5d8:58a0:ebfc:b5fb:88a3:27a5:ce96/64 scope global secondary = deprecated dynamic valid_lft 84064sec preferred_lft 4294964960sec Can iproute2 be "fixed" ? or is it the expected output ? thanks, Benoit --=20 :wq