From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: net.ipv6.conf.INT.accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen defaults to 0 Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:36:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20090202.213616.258001767.davem@davemloft.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, sega01@gmail.com To: pekkas@netcore.fi Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:45707 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751907AbZBCFgU (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2009 00:36:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Pekka Savola Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 06:38:49 +0200 (EET) > As reported and discussed below and in > , > to accept "route information option" on Linux, you have to manually > change accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen sysctl value. Other > implementations that I know of accept this by default. > > Is it intentional that Route Information options are ignored by default? > > I suspect not -- if so, the default value should be (IMHO) 64 or if > that's disagreeable, 48. > > Even if this is intentional, I think the intentions should be revisited. It looks very intentional, both via the code and it's documentation in ip-sysctl.txt It seems that it is disabled like this by default when accept_ra_rtr_pref is enabled, and that seems pretty reasonable to me. I'm sure whoever made that decision didn't do so on a whim and had a very good reason for it.