From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: Allow non-gateway ECMP for IPv6 Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 20:59:10 -0600 Message-ID: <89497565-f1e6-a916-70d3-dfc7efa7a7e4@gmail.com> References: <20180430211529.8295-1-Thomas.Winter@alliedtelesis.co.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , Alexey Kuznetsov , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Ido Schimmel To: Thomas Winter , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f172.google.com ([209.85.192.172]:36401 "EHLO mail-pf0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751428AbeEAC6g (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Apr 2018 22:58:36 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f172.google.com with SMTP id w129so2821824pfd.3 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 19:58:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180430211529.8295-1-Thomas.Winter@alliedtelesis.co.nz> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 4/30/18 3:15 PM, Thomas Winter wrote: > It is valid to have static routes where the nexthop > is an interface not an address such as tunnels. > For IPv4 it was possible to use ECMP on these routes > but not for IPv6. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Winter > Cc: David Ahern > Cc: "David S. Miller" > Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov > Cc: Hideaki YOSHIFUJI > --- > include/net/ip6_route.h | 3 +-- > net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c | 3 --- > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > Interesting. Existing code inserts the dev nexthop as a separate route. Change looks good to me. Acked-by: David Ahern