From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: ipv6: why disable ipv6 on last address removal? Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:44:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20100104.224436.107234750.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20091208192046.GA5649@midget.suse.cz> <20091208.125611.135547597.davem@davemloft.net> <4B1F5423.4070109@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jbohac@suse.cz, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:48568 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753758Ab0AEGob (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jan 2010 01:44:31 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B1F5423.4070109@linux-ipv6.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 16:39:15 +0900 > Well, AFAIK, it is basically ancient thing. > Some (rather new) paramters are exactly related bringing > up each interface. > > Such parameters should be set _before_ it is brought up. > For now, people can do this using the "default" value. I think we should retain inet6 device private structure after we allocate it the first time that an ipv6 action occurs for the device, exactly so that settings made earlier can be retained.