From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Flavio Leitner Subject: Re: possible bug in IPv6 MLD retransmissions Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 14:27:11 -0300 Message-ID: <20130522172711.GC17240@obelix.rh> References: <20130517032449.GA3595@obelix.rh> <20130518173105.GD29528@order.stressinduktion.org> <20130521150616.GA8513@obelix.rh> <20130522004027.GD32093@order.stressinduktion.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI To: David Stevens Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30417 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756258Ab3EVR22 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2013 13:28:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 07:30:39AM -0400, David Stevens wrote: > First, I wouldn't call this a "bug"; it is listed as a "SHOULD", not a > "MUST", so > it is not required for compliance, though it is a good feature to add. > > Second, I think doing this on all LL addresses unconditionally isn't a > good > idea. If some configuration is using thousands of LL addrs for reasons of > their > own, they would suddenly be blasted with unexpected MLD reports where > they have none now. I don't see why tracking it would be such a problem -- > if nothing else, you could simply add a counter for the number of valid LL > addrs > incremented on DAD completion, and send these whenever it transitions from > 0 to 1. It becomes a bug (and that's why I started with 'possible') if dad completes after the two MLD reports sent with ``::'' source, because routers will ignore those initial reports and the system is left out. Thanks, -- fbl