From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: specifying scopid's for link-local IPv6 addrs Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:01:19 -0700 Message-ID: <46A4FAFF.8010809@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Linux Network Development list Return-path: Received: from palrel10.hp.com ([156.153.255.245]:37077 "EHLO palrel10.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759484AbXGWTBU (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:01:20 -0400 Received: from tardy.cup.hp.com (tardy.cup.hp.com [15.244.56.217]) by palrel10.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E791434B96 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:01:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tardy.cup.hp.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_28810)/8.9.3 SMKit7.02) with ESMTP id MAA28002 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:01:19 -0700 (PDT) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Folks - People running netperf have reported that they have trouble with IPv6 under Linux. Specifically, wereas the use of link-local IPv6 addresses "just works" in netperf under a number of "other OSes" they do not under Linux. I'm ass-u-me-ing 2.6 here, but not sure exactly which ones - I've seen it on a 2.6.18-based RHEL5. Some poking about and conversation has suggested that one has to set a sin6_scope_id in the sockaddr_in6. This needs to be an index of one of the interfaces in the system, which I presume means walking some additional structures. Is this a requirement which might be expected to remain in the future, or is it something which might just go away? That will have an effect on netperf future development. thanks, rick jones