From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org,
bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, ghen@telenet.be
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 28512] New: IPv6 SLAAC address preferred over static one as source address
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:20:00 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110329.172000.102543782.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110207152048.22c51184.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 15:20:48 -0800
>> SLAAC addresses will have a limited preferred lifetime (as defined by the
>> router), static addresses will usually have an unlimited preferred lifetime
>> (0). So it makes a lot of sense to take this preferred lifetime into account
>> for source address selection (how is it otherwise "preferred"?).
This is debatable.
One could just as easily say that an address with a shorter preferred
lifetime has been revalidated more recently, and therefore is more
likely to be uptodate, valid, and lead to a usable path.
I think the lack of specification for the final tie-breaker in the RFC
was intentional :-)
The specification has to address this, and until the situation is more
clear cut than it is now I don't see any benefit for changing Linux's
behavior. Especially since there is a configuration based workaround
which works for people in the short-term.
But I'm willing to be convinced, and those wanting to convince me can
post a patch for review to netdev@vger.kernel.org :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-30 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <bug-28512-10286@https.bugzilla.kernel.org/>
2011-02-07 23:20 ` [Bugme-new] [Bug 28512] New: IPv6 SLAAC address preferred over static one as source address Andrew Morton
2011-03-30 0:20 ` David Miller [this message]
2011-03-30 7:31 ` Geert Hendrickx
2011-03-30 8:59 ` David Miller
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=20110329.172000.102543782.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org \
--cc=bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org \
--cc=ghen@telenet.be \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).