From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [patch net-next] ipv6: allow userspace to create address with IFLA_F_TEMPORARY flag Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:29:41 +0100 Message-ID: <20131027132941.GA1443@minipsycho.orion> References: <1382622355-6500-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , David Miller , kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net, thaller@redhat.com, Stephen Hemminger To: Vladislav Yasevich Return-path: Received: from mail-ea0-f180.google.com ([209.85.215.180]:62251 "EHLO mail-ea0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753995Ab3J0N3o (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2013 09:29:44 -0400 Received: by mail-ea0-f180.google.com with SMTP id l9so1303660eaj.39 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 06:29:43 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 01:05:34AM CEST, vyasevich@gmail.com wrote: >On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> This is needed in order to implement userspace address configuration, >> namely ip6-privacy (rfc4941) in NetworkManager. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko >> --- >> net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c >> index cd3fb30..962c7c9 100644 >> --- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c >> +++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c >> @@ -3715,7 +3715,8 @@ inet6_rtm_newaddr(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh) >> return -ENODEV; >> >> /* We ignore other flags so far. */ >> - ifa_flags = ifm->ifa_flags & (IFA_F_NODAD | IFA_F_HOMEADDRESS); >> + ifa_flags = ifm->ifa_flags & (IFA_F_NODAD | IFA_F_HOMEADDRESS | >> + IFA_F_TEMPORARY); >> >> ifa = ipv6_get_ifaddr(net, pfx, dev, 1); >> if (ifa == NULL) { >> -- >> 1.8.3.1 >> > >Jiri > >So, is the idea behind this is that all of temp address management >would be done in user space? If so, then you >may have to verify that no-one sets the lifetime values on the prefix >in your other patch. I am still trying to figure out >why this would be needed. The idea is to provide possibility to do address configuration not in kernel but rather in userspace (as it is done for example in NetworkManager) Maybe I'm missing something, but why is it problem to have the possibility to set lifetime even for temporary prefix? > >Thanks >-vlad