From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFDA7C678D5 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 03:41:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229779AbjCKDla (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2023 22:41:30 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36874 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229562AbjCKDl3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2023 22:41:29 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x62f.google.com (mail-pl1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02ACD12EACD for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 19:41:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id h8so7636946plf.10 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 19:41:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; t=1678506087; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=5NvXwZzaPCbq6uRhEkZ6ujOHeAaYaBBfV8EWkiAGW0E=; b=gBF+mXgavmgwEf3kP5cPJ3mPSyenvWQxRxMUM/I+ZNDI5mK0zUSnhgmzfWYxnp5/SG 2opa83CFBpQiB72QZhT21gCN87jowZmTTr9cOAteG32TjQJMyH+Hwt31dPIxwbX5H/bH pP1aYVebNhryy24v5hsyKvJEPJo8Dn6iw2C482DQcbdA0TGY1hXeGbietAqCw8+MEDAK YpjvBkCpbtZ+0l5OX14xZfd/+XUpXm1WeHSZAszNa/N0Ihs+UQJHWpZ33sw5+j84NIAO 7JyM8EV/61ecyQTpQcqoqtPKLjDb6O97MKoALWnd3xH8+unTcbHNt8bIJ+Um14IDoPd1 prUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678506087; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=5NvXwZzaPCbq6uRhEkZ6ujOHeAaYaBBfV8EWkiAGW0E=; b=FTYgKWoDBsGwGAMZyReRhjQ7/NLA/gO7sfTXTJGnxyKYGGHYNU9xQsl3ZEtny3ciWg pLJK0USi02sgAqGuZz+fT4eVkAnKR9c1XsXAz4DenK5R3sBUtXVo4IBd9IC5R5iJsE8s ANCr5jayQxWty5HssBIjZArFX6gG2M8HJq5/ZF6p4GBxeqdionBilHbIlDM7GGd/SoHk YIQv4cXDoeDHMX47D95OKVUAKKUOutzyFtdxrk2zhsIFRvVIG6Z2suoaoSGKJfxkLeM5 UqA/pMJjp9BafayD5ZBrQ6Yvx95WjkHncSqqEtOOHWzfJb81/ruPdIVZJwH6gO2eKNMv kmRA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWwja1lJtUy+lBvj0MADnKl4oSlshMlklP/VKnbNf82neqcmCYc ULaupYz1Lf+kyyZlFKi6ujHVDg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/FHsvyMOlrwinkP9JoEdpxa7FPhoLeB9ErhuXyyMkP4EB56+E+e2ziI9HLrFMrw3ACeWT74w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:29a9:b0:cd:c79:514b with SMTP id f41-20020a056a2029a900b000cd0c79514bmr22813924pzh.2.1678506087442; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 19:41:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-120-218.wavecable.com. [204.195.120.218]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b5-20020aa78105000000b005a90f2cce30sm509210pfi.49.2023.03.10.19.41.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Mar 2023 19:41:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 19:41:25 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Petr Machata Cc: "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , , David Ahern , Shuah Khan , "Ido Schimmel" , Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] net: Extend address label support Message-ID: <20230310194125.33ca44d7@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:44:53 +0100 Petr Machata wrote: > IPv4 addresses can be tagged with label strings. Unlike IPv6 addrlabels, > which are used for prioritization of IPv6 addresses, these "ip address > labels" are simply tags that the userspace can assign to IP addresses > arbitrarily. > > IPv4 has had support for these tags since before Linux was tracked in GIT. > However it has never been possible to change the label after it is once > defined. This limits usefulness of this feature. A userspace that wants to > change a label might drop and recreate the address, but that disrupts > routing and is just impractical. > > IPv6 addresses lack support for address labels (in the sense of address > tags) altogether. > > In this patchset, extend IPv4 to allow changing the label defined at an > address (in patch #1). Then, in patches #2 and #3, extend IPv6 with a suite > of address label operations fully analogous with those defined for IPv4. > Then in patches #4 and #5 add selftest coverage for the feature. > > An example session with the feature in action: > > # ip address add dev d 2001:db8:1::1/64 label foo > # ip address show dev d > 4: d: mtu 1500 qdisc [...] > link/ether 06:29:74:fd:1f:eb brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet6 2001:db8:1::1/64 scope global foo <-- > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > inet6 fe80::429:74ff:fefd:1feb/64 scope link d > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > > # ip address replace dev d 2001:db8:1::1/64 label bar > # ip address show dev d > 4: d: mtu 1500 qdisc [...] > link/ether 06:29:74:fd:1f:eb brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet6 2001:db8:1::1/64 scope global bar <-- > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > inet6 fe80::429:74ff:fefd:1feb/64 scope link d > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > > # ip address del dev d 2001:db8:1::1/64 label foo > RTNETLINK answers: Cannot assign requested address > # ip address del dev d 2001:db8:1::1/64 label bar This would add a lot of naming confusion with existing IPv6 address labels. And MPLS labels. See man ip-addrlabel for more info. Can't think of better term for this. Tag would raise conflicts with vlan/vxlan tag term. Name would be confusing vs DNS naming. Also, most of the real world manages addresses through automated services so doing it with ip address isn't going to help.