From: "Bjørn Mork" <bjorn@mork.no>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"Valdis Kletnieks" <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>,
"Jonas Lippuner" <jonas@lippuner.ca>,
吉藤英明 <hideaki.yoshifuji@miraclelinux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: addrconf: fix Juniper SSL VPN client regression
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:38:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87shvg9txc.fsf@miraculix.mork.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c6a714eb-fff9-9624-bfea-db9a05c258e6@stressinduktion.org> (Hannes Frederic Sowa's message of "Mon, 11 Jul 2016 09:17:19 -0400")
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> writes:
> On 09.07.2016 19:23, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> writes:
>>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 23:13, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>>>> The Juniper SSL VPN client use a "tun" interface and seems to
>>>> be picky about visible changes.to it. Commit cc9da6cc4f56
>>>> ("ipv6: addrconf: use stable address generator for ARPHRD_NONE")
>>>> made such interfaces get an auto-generated IPv6 link local address
>>>> by default, similar to most other interface types. This made the
>>>> Juniper SSL VPN client fail for unknown reasons.
>>>>
>>>> Fixing this regression by effectively reverting the behaviour to
>>>> what we had before, while keeping the new "addrgenmode random"
>>>> feature.
>>>
>>> I wonder if we can simply add a flag, something like
>>> IFF_SUPPRESS_AUTO_IPV6_LL, to net_device->priv_flags and use that. So we
>>> can keep behavior for qmi, vxlan-gpe and gre. tun is the only device
>>> that is really user space facing, so maybe we just limit it to this?
>>
>> Sounds good to me, but I don't know if the use case really qualifies as
>>
>> "* You should have a pretty good reason to be extending these flags."
>>
>>
>> The automatic address is certainly nice to have, but "good reason"? I
>> don't know... We can always just configure those devices for automatic
>> LL addresses using "ip link set foo addrgen random" or similar.
>
> I do think it is important enough to include it into priv_flags,
> especially if you compare it to other flags in there. We also can easily
> add new priv_flags member or enlarge to long if we run out in the long term.
OK, I'll cook a new version with that.
> I would slightly prefer if tunnels keep the behavior we introduced one
> release(?) ago.
Depends on how you count. it was introduced in v4.5.
Bjørn
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-11 13:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-09 21:13 [PATCH net] ipv6: addrconf: fix Juniper SSL VPN client regression Bjørn Mork
2016-07-09 22:19 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-07-09 23:23 ` Bjørn Mork
2016-07-11 13:17 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-07-11 13:38 ` Bjørn Mork [this message]
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=87shvg9txc.fsf@miraculix.mork.no \
--to=bjorn@mork.no \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=hideaki.yoshifuji@miraclelinux.com \
--cc=jonas@lippuner.ca \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).