netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix von Leitner <felix-kernel@fefe.de>
To: Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@hp.com>
Cc: Brian Haley <brian.haley@hp.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: socket api problem: can't bind an ipv6 socket to ::ffff:0.0.0.0
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:14:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090317141432.GA10575@codeblau.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49BFA9F0.6070702@hp.com>

> Sorry, I just don't buy this.  You imply that you don't want the overhead
> of storing IPv6 addresses, but you still get this with ::ffff:0.0.0.0.
> In fact, now your overhead is even worse since ever IPv4 address will be
> stored stored and interpreted as IPv6 128 bit address.

> If you really care about overhead, run 2 services.  Your IPv6 service
> will only track real IPv6 addresses and will reduce you total overhead.

I am worried about the overhead of storing the IPv6 addresses.
I am not storing them in the IPv4 case.

But the socket code has been rewritten to use IPv6 addresses only,
precisely because IPv4-mapped addresses exist.

> If you don't care about overhead, just bind a single socket to :: and
> you will get behavior identical for the ::fff:0.0.0.0 case, but with
> the added benefit of tracking real ipv6 addresses as well.

You probably mean well but please stick to the problem at hand and don't
speculate about my app.

> Having written support for ::ffff:0.0.0.0, I've always thought it was
> a bastardized case that didn't provide any benefits.  It was like saying:
> "I've got IPv6 on my system, but I don't really support it, even though
> I pretend that I do."

The app has a command line option to specify which address to bind to.
The app understands IPv4 addresses and converts them to ipv4 mapped
addresses so it can only deal with sockaddr_in6 when talking to the
kernel and does not need to store info on what kind of socket family it
is dealing with.

If someone specifies 0.0.0.0, it does not work.  It's that easy.

Now it may be a fascinating side discussion on whether you think IPv4
mapped 0.0.0.0 is useful or not, but rest assured: it is useful to at
least one high profile app that is so far running on Linux.

> > Why would you say that?
> Because that case doesn't provide any benefits.

You may not see it but it does.

> It only has the drawback that you have to deal with ipv4-mapped IPv6
> addresses witch is the overhead of the whole thing.

That is not a drawback.  On the contrary.  It greatly simplifies how the
app deals with the socket API.

> If you are prepared to deal with it, you might as well deal with real ipv6 addresses
> at the same time and mitigate your overhead somewhat.

You are currently proving all the snide remarks by the BSD people about
the Linux IP stack true, and the "professionalism" snide remarks of the
Solaris people.  Great work, man.

Felix

  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-17 14:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-16 23:48 socket api problem: can't bind an ipv6 socket to ::ffff:0.0.0.0 Felix von Leitner
2009-03-17  0:00 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-03-17  0:18   ` Felix von Leitner
2009-03-17  2:26 ` Brian Haley
2009-03-17  2:47   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-17  8:51     ` Bjørn Mork
2009-03-17 16:00     ` Brian Haley
2009-03-17 12:58   ` Felix von Leitner
2009-03-17 13:47     ` Vlad Yasevich
2009-03-17 14:14       ` Felix von Leitner [this message]
2009-03-17 14:57         ` Vlad Yasevich
2009-03-17 17:51           ` Felix von Leitner
2009-03-17 15:21         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-17 18:01           ` Felix von Leitner
2009-03-17 15:59     ` Brian Haley
     [not found]       ` <20090317180840.GC13270@codeblau.de>
2009-03-17 19:21         ` Brian Haley
2009-03-17 19:31           ` David Miller
2009-03-17 21:05             ` Vlad Yasevich
2009-03-17 21:05             ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] ipv6: Disallow binding to v4-mapped address on v6-only socket Vlad Yasevich
2009-03-17 21:06             ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] ipv6: Allow ipv4 wildcard binds after ipv6 address binds Vlad Yasevich
2009-03-17 21:06             ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] ipv6: Make v4-mapped bindings consitant with IPv4 Vlad Yasevich
2009-03-17 21:06             ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] ipv6: Fix conflict resolutions during ipv6 binding Vlad Yasevich
2009-03-18  9:13             ` socket api problem: can't bind an ipv6 socket to ::ffff:0.0.0.0 Jarek Poplawski
2009-03-18 21:36               ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:53                 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-03-19  0:32                   ` David Miller
2009-03-17  9:03 ` Bjørn Mork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090317141432.GA10575@codeblau.de \
    --to=felix-kernel@fefe.de \
    --cc=brian.haley@hp.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vladislav.yasevich@hp.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).