From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brian Haley Subject: Re: IPV6 address lifetime update Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 16:33:07 -0500 Message-ID: <4D093413.5030001@hp.com> References: <4D091812.8060109@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Alexey Kuznetsov , "Pekka Savola (ipv6)" , James Morris , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Patrick McHardy To: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar Return-path: Received: from g1t0026.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.33]:6439 "EHLO g1t0026.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750864Ab0LOVdN (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 16:33:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4D091812.8060109@codeaurora.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/15/2010 02:33 PM, Abhijeet Dharmapurikar wrote: > Our product uses Linux kernel 2.6.35. For IPV6 support, the device i= s using stateless address configuration. We see the global scope addres= s is assigned correctly when the network interface transitions to UP st= ate. However, we are seeing issue where subsequent router advertisemen= t (RA) messages for assigned prefix results in *new* IPV6 address on sa= me interface and duplicate-address-detection for same. Our goal is to = have the subsequent router RA message simply update the address lifetim= e for existing IPV6 address(es) using the specific prefix per RFC2462 s= ection 5.5.3(e). Looking at /net/ipv6/addrconf.c function addrconf_pre= fix_rcv(), it does not seem like updating existing addresses only (with= out new address creation) is supported. Is this correct? Or what conf= iguration options are required to achieve the desired behavior? > Below is an excerpt from =91ip addr=92 output, showing interface stat= e after a few RA messages have been received. Note we have configured = the router to send RA frequently for testing purposes. Ideally only on= e global address will be present, with lifetime updated on each RA arri= val for same prefix. > Thank you in advance for guidance on this issue. >=20 > 3: net0: mtu 1280 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 > link/[530] What type of interface is this? Doesn't look like Ethernet. > inet6 2002:c023:9c17:c23:f2f9:6c83:be61:a743/64 scope global dyna= mic > valid_lft 7170sec preferred_lft 3570sec > inet6 2002:c023:9c17:c23:1282:1b78:75dd:b9ed/64 scope global dyna= mic > valid_lft 7150sec preferred_lft 3550sec > inet6 2002:c023:9c17:c23:5326:714d:e25b:797e/64 scope global dyna= mic > valid_lft 7134sec preferred_lft 3534sec > inet6 2002:c023:9c17:c23:488c:95c8:34a2:587f/64 scope global dyna= mic > valid_lft 7117sec preferred_lft 3517sec > inet6 fe80::97e0:7661:c51d:bdb/64 scope link > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever These don't look like privacy addresses since they'd have either "tempo= rary" or "secondary", someone is generating a MAC though... -Brian