From: sohny thomas <sohny.kernel@gmail.com>
To: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org,
davem@davemloft.net, kumuda <kumuda@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
hannes@stressinduktion.org
Subject: Re: ipv6: default route for link local address is not added while assigning a address
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 14:19:09 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52D3A885.2080107@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52D2F201.1090903@gmail.com>
On Friday 10 January 2014 10:46 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:33:08PM +0100, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
>> CC: netdev
>>
>> Le 10/01/2014 13:20, sohny thomas a écrit :
>>> Default route for link local address is configured automatically if
>>> NETWORKING_IPV6=yes is in ifcfg-eth*.
>>> When the route table for the interface is flushed and a new address is
>>> added to
>>> the same device with out removing linklocal addr, default route for link
>>> local
>>> address has to added by default.
>> I would say that removing the link local route but not the link local
>> address
>> is a configuration problem.
>> If you remove a connected route but not the associated address, you will
>> have
>> the same problem.
> We have some user accessible routes that are essential for IPv6 stack
> to work at all. So I don't know if I can agree with that.
>
> Maybe flush is a bit too aggressive?
>
Hi ,
Thank you for the inputs.
In the test for ipv6 default address selection , we are testing the rule
2 as specified in RFC 6724
If Scope(SA) < Scope(SB): If Scope(SA) < Scope(D), then prefer SB
and otherwise prefer SA.
Similarly, if Scope(SB) < Scope(SA): If Scope(SB) < Scope(D), then
prefer SA and otherwise prefer SB.
Test:
Check 04:
Destination: ff08::2(OS)
Candidate Source Addresses: fec0::1(SS) or LLA(LS)
Result: fec0::1(SS)
Scope(LLA) < Scope(fec0::1): If Scope(LLA) < Scope(ff08::2), yes,
prefer fec0::1
Now in the test its flushing all the routes and adding an address ,
which in causes to add route into the routing table including the link
local routes.
Earlier in 2.6.32 it used to work fine now due to the above mentioned
check-in this is not happening
Of course we can still just delete a route and add , but even if we
delete the link local route, IMHO i think it should update the LLA route
when the interface is next added an address or bought up which ever is
the case.
Regards,
Sohny
next parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-13 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <52D2F201.1090903@gmail.com>
2014-01-13 8:49 ` sohny thomas [this message]
2014-01-17 8:34 ` ipv6: default route for link local address is not added while assigning a address sohny thomas
2014-01-17 12:16 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
[not found] <52CFE594.8010808@gmail.com>
2014-01-10 16:33 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2014-01-10 17:16 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52D3A885.2080107@gmail.com \
--to=sohny.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=kumuda@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).