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 14:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100826.142755.15249596.davem@davemloft.net> References: <4C76C73F.4080206@hp.com> <20100826.131801.246519955.davem@davemloft.net> <4C76DA62.8040109@candelatech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: brian.haley@hp.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: greearb@candelatech.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:41891 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754061Ab0HZV1k (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:27:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C76DA62.8040109@candelatech.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Ben Greear Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 14:19:30 -0700 > In our case, we enable IPv6 in user-space, and then we want to get > some immediate indication that indeed the process is working as > expected. When DAD completes, you'll get a similar indication. > In other cases, we want to remove all IPv6 addresses, so if we have > not even been notified that the IP exists, then we cannot know how > to delete it. You can add a netlink message to accomplish that. This has been asked for in other contexts as well. > We've been running this patch for several years, and it has not > caused any obvious problems with other tools, so I think it's safe > enough. And your level of exposure compared to upstream is...? :-) Anyways, even if it's implemented in an error free way it's still not necessary the best way to go about this.