From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roberto Nibali Subject: Re: [PATCH] shutting down an interface should remove ipv4 addresses Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:38:01 +0200 Message-ID: <443D7339.2040700@drugphish.ch> References: <20060411.005625.91443294.davem@davemloft.net> <20060411.013503.04535700.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: koszik@atw.hu, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from drugphish.ch ([69.55.226.176]:1174 "EHLO www.drugphish.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932320AbWDLViL (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:38:11 -0400 To: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20060411.013503.04535700.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org David S. Miller wrote: > From: Matyas Koszik > Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 10:08:01 +0200 (CEST) > >> Then it maybe shouldn't affect the flow of packets while the >> interface is down - or is it also something people depend on? > > Yes, people probably do depend upon it. Not that my voice weights in too much, but I should like to note that our network and firewall setup depends on this behaviour since the early 2.2.x kernel releases. 2-stage network setup (address assignment and link state) is very much to our liking :). I would not be too thrilled to change that again. Best regards, Roberto Nibali, ratz -- echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq' | dc