From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] net: ipv6: Make address flushing on ifdown optional Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:47:08 -0700 Message-ID: <54C2972C.3080702@gmail.com> References: <1421263039-96198-1-git-send-email-dsahern@gmail.com> <20150122224033.6e2db5ce@urahara> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, hannes@redhat.com To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:56940 "EHLO mail-pa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756292AbbAWSrO (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 13:47:14 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id kq14so7614213pab.0 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 10:47:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20150122224033.6e2db5ce@urahara> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 1/22/15 11:40 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Would this break existing application expecting a particular semantic > by listening to netlink? What happens to packets received with the static > address when interface is down? With IPv4 Linux is mostly a weak host > model, and IPv6 somewhere in between. > > For vendors that control the application stack or have limited number > of services this would work fine, but what about RHEL? > > The intent of making it a sysctl option is to maintain backwards compatibility and allow users to take the new functionality if desired - which includes accepting changes in behavior. David