From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [net-next] ipv6: Enable netlink notification for tentative addresses. Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:18:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100826.131801.246519955.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100825.212456.71107442.davem@davemloft.net> <4C76B770.4030800@candelatech.com> <4C76C73F.4080206@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: greearb@candelatech.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: brian.haley@hp.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:56893 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753902Ab0HZURq (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:17:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C76C73F.4080206@hp.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Brian Haley Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 15:57:51 -0400 > But then we get a message for an address that can't be used because > it hasn't passed DAD, I'm not so sure that is a good thing, > especially if we don't get notified when it passes DAD. I think that we shouldn't send notifications for an address that can't even be used. So essentially I argue against this patch in any form :)