[RFC] ipv6: protocol for address routes

[RFC] ipv6: protocol for address routes

[Stephen Hemminger]

This fixes a problem spotted with zebra, but not sure if it is necessary a kernel problem.
With IPV6 when an address is added to an interface, Zebra creates a duplicate RIB
entry, one as a connected route, and other as a kernel route.

When an address is added to an interface the RTN_NEWADDR message causes Zebra
to create a connected route. In IPV4 when an address is added to an interface a RTN_NEWROUTE
message is set to user space with the protocol RTPROT_KERNEL. Zebra ignores these messages,
because it already has the connected route.

The problem is that route created in IPV6 has route protocol == RTPROT_BOOT.
Was this a design decision or a bug? This fixes it. Same patch applies to both
net-2.6 and stable.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>

--- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c	2008-08-18 21:58:51.000000000 -0700
+++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c	2008-08-18 22:00:26.000000000 -0700
@@ -1688,6 +1688,7 @@ addrconf_prefix_route(struct in6_addr *p
 		.fc_dst_len = plen,
 		.fc_flags = RTF_UP | flags,
 		.fc_nlinfo.nl_net = dev_net(dev),
+		.fc_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL,
 	};
 
 	ipv6_addr_copy(&cfg.fc_dst, pfx);

Re: [RFC] ipv6: protocol for address routes

[David Miller]

From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:54:41 -0700

> This fixes a problem spotted with zebra, but not sure if it is necessary a kernel problem.
> With IPV6 when an address is added to an interface, Zebra creates a duplicate RIB
> entry, one as a connected route, and other as a kernel route.
> 
> When an address is added to an interface the RTN_NEWADDR message causes Zebra
> to create a connected route. In IPV4 when an address is added to an interface a RTN_NEWROUTE
> message is set to user space with the protocol RTPROT_KERNEL. Zebra ignores these messages,
> because it already has the connected route.
> 
> The problem is that route created in IPV6 has route protocol == RTPROT_BOOT.
> Was this a design decision or a bug? This fixes it. Same patch applies to both
> net-2.6 and stable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>

I don't have any strong opinion and it seems correct to me.

Anyone else have any thoughts before I apply this?

> --- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c	2008-08-18 21:58:51.000000000 -0700
> +++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c	2008-08-18 22:00:26.000000000 -0700
> @@ -1688,6 +1688,7 @@ addrconf_prefix_route(struct in6_addr *p
>  		.fc_dst_len = plen,
>  		.fc_flags = RTF_UP | flags,
>  		.fc_nlinfo.nl_net = dev_net(dev),
> +		.fc_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL,
>  	};
>  
>  	ipv6_addr_copy(&cfg.fc_dst, pfx);
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [RFC] ipv6: protocol for address routes

[David Miller]

From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 08:54:41 -0700

> This fixes a problem spotted with zebra, but not sure if it is
> necessary a kernel problem.  With IPV6 when an address is added to
> an interface, Zebra creates a duplicate RIB entry, one as a
> connected route, and other as a kernel route.
>
> When an address is added to an interface the RTN_NEWADDR message
> causes Zebra to create a connected route. In IPV4 when an address is
> added to an interface a RTN_NEWROUTE message is set to user space
> with the protocol RTPROT_KERNEL. Zebra ignores these messages,
> because it already has the connected route.
>
> The problem is that route created in IPV6 has route protocol ==
> RTPROT_BOOT.  Was this a design decision or a bug? This fixes
> it. Same patch applies to both net-2.6 and stable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>

I've applied this to net-2.6, thanks Stephen.