From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki Subject: Re: [IPv6] interface-local multicast escapes the local node Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 23:12:46 +0900 Message-ID: <5116595E.2080601@linux-ipv6.org> References: <20130206084949.GA11193@eerihug-hybrid.ki.sw.ericsson.se> <20130206121248.GC10290@order.stressinduktion.org> <5112759E.90104@linux-ipv6.org> <20130206165415.GB19537@order.stressinduktion.org> <20130209121005.GB23281@order.stressinduktion.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Erik Hugne , netdev@vger.kernel.org, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki To: hannes@stressinduktion.org Return-path: Received: from 94.43.138.210.xn.2iij.net ([210.138.43.94]:55526 "EHLO mail.st-paulia.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757261Ab3BIOMs (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Feb 2013 09:12:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20130209121005.GB23281@order.stressinduktion.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 05:54:15PM +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 12:24:14AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote: >>> NAK. I think we should select routes via loopback device here. >> >> Will try your idea, thanks. > > Does this patch look reasonable? Btw. i am pleased to see this kind of > things work out as expected most of the time (addrtype checking etc. all > in place). :) > Well, I rethink of what "interface-local" means. It seems applications will join ff01::/16%eth0 instead of ff01::/16%lo. If so, your original patch seems better. My bad, sorry. Would you update original one, with minor modification that defers kfree_skb() after incrementing MIB, please? If you think we should join ff01::{1,2} by default, you can send another patch for it. (BTW, why don't we join ff05::2, then? ;-)) Thanks. --yoshfuji