From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2] ipv6: log autoconfiguration failures Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 12:22:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20131212.122241.2022824170198915190.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1386762314-5149-1-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com> <20131211192138.GB4675@order.stressinduktion.org> <52A99B56.1070503@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net, jpirko@redhat.com To: dvlasenk@redhat.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:38426 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751700Ab3LLRWo (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Dec 2013 12:22:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: <52A99B56.1070503@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Denys Vlasenko Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 12:17:42 +0100 > I can easily imagine their frustration. Kernel _knows_ why > it didn't work, and it's not expected to normally pappen, > why didn't it tell anything about it? Packets are dropped silently, ARP fails and entries go stale silently, none of this is logged with kernel messages, why is ipv6 autoconf so unique and important to justify different behavior? Give it statistics just like we have for every other kind of similar event.