From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH] iproute: disallow ip rule del without parameters Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 09:05:40 -0700 Message-ID: <20160901090540.707a6c87@xeon-e3> References: <20160824204252.2melotzdx6ftzgaq@ppc.Dlink> <20160829105325.40230e41@xeon-e3> <20160830115156.GB17087@unicorn.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Andrey Jr. Melnikov" , Stephen Hemminger , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Michal Kubecek Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:33077 "EHLO mail-pf0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934058AbcIAQFf (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2016 12:05:35 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f175.google.com with SMTP id g202so9615496pfb.0 for ; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 09:05:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160830115156.GB17087@unicorn.suse.cz> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 13:51:56 +0200 Michal Kubecek wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 10:53:25AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 23:43:00 +0300 > > "Andrey Jr. Melnikov" wrote: > > > > > Disallow run `ip rule del` without any parameter to avoid delete any first > > > rule from table. > ... > > Actually ip rule delete without arguments deletes all rules. > > Which could be a bug or feature depending on the user. > > I can imagine somebody is doing something like deleting all rules > > and putting in new ones for PBR. > > We have "ip rule flush" for that, don't we? > > Michal Kubecek I went ahead and applied this, seemed better to give error than deleting all rules.