From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [Bug 18212] New: force_igmp_version ignored when a IGMPv3 query received (+1 line patch) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:24:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100914.142418.149835514.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100910091936.75eabbf6@nehalam> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: shemminger@linux-foundation.org, herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: dlstevens@us.ibm.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:44789 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755561Ab0INVYA (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:24:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: David Stevens Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:20:40 -0700 > netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org wrote on 09/10/2010 09:19:36 AM: > >> >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18212 >> >> Summary: force_igmp_version ignored when a IGMPv3 query >> received (+1 line patch) > >> >> Created an attachment (id=29512) >> --> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=29512) >> fix force_igmp_version v3 query problem >> >> After all these years, it turns out that the >> /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/force_igmp_version >> parameter isn't fully implemented. > > I don't think it's correct to send a v2 response to a v3 > query in any case. The question for answering v3 queries was > whether to answer them with a v3 report, or to drop them and > ignore them when force_igmp_version==2. I chose to respond, > but I can see the case for dropping it too. I don't agree that > a v3 query should be answered with a v2 resport (a real v2 > host would drop it). Do you have an alternative patch to suggest?