From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brian Haley Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] IPv6: fix bug when specifying the non-exist outgoing interface Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 13:39:06 -0400 Message-ID: <4844303A.7090909@hp.com> References: <20080602.172009.84304151.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> <4843B65C.1060702@cn.fujitsu.com> <48441C82.1070609@hp.com> <20080603.014105.73332390.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: shanwei@cn.fujitsu.com, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?WU9TSElGVUpJIEhpZGVha2kgLyAbJEI1SEYjMVFMQBsoQg==?= Return-path: Received: from g1t0026.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.33]:13616 "EHLO g1t0026.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758596AbYFBRjJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2008 13:39:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080603.014105.73332390.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote: >> In the current git tree, this :: address is going to turn-into ::1, so >> the ifindex is irrelevant, the packet will be looped-back. Older >> kernels could transmit the packet on the wire using the default route. >> Can you elaborate on the problem you were seeing? > > Confused. We are not talking about destination address but source > address, right? I was testing with both set to :: to see if the source address was ever getting transmitted as ::, but only noticed the destination address was on an older kernel. That was my confusion, but there is still some bug here. -Brian