From: enh <enh@google.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: brian.haley@hp.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux kernel's IPV6_MULTICAST_HOPS default is 64; should be 1?
Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 23:19:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTingTdmhyJhENb9AYDjUT7m_-yQflw5-gJqIA9iw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100503.230553.200626786.davem@davemloft.net>
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 23:05, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Brian Haley <brian.haley@hp.com>
> Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 22:16:39 -0400
>
>> It looks like a bug to me, feel free to send along a patch :)
>
> Is it? The quoted text is only about setting the value and what
> effect setting -1 or whatever has.
>
> For getting the value, the behavior described sounds just fine.
>
> The default for a socket is whatever the kernel-wide default is.
for the *unicast* hops, a part of the RFC i didn't quote says:
If the [IPV6_UNICAST_HOPS] option is not set, the
system selects a default value.
but for the *multicast* hops, which is what i'm talking about, this
part of the quoted text seems pretty definitive:
If IPV6_MULTICAST_HOPS is not set, the default is 1
(same as IPv4 today)
this is what my test shows isn't true of linux; linux reuses its
unicast default instead.
--
Elliott Hughes - http://who/enh - http://jessies.org/~enh/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-04 6:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-04 1:33 linux kernel's IPV6_MULTICAST_HOPS default is 64; should be 1? enh
2010-05-04 2:16 ` Brian Haley
2010-05-04 3:58 ` enh
2010-05-04 6:05 ` David Miller
2010-05-04 6:19 ` enh [this message]
2010-05-04 6:22 ` David Miller
2010-05-04 6:27 ` enh
2010-05-04 6:42 ` David Miller
2010-05-04 7:48 ` David Stevens
2010-05-04 7:57 ` David Miller
2010-05-04 14:40 ` Brian Haley
2010-05-04 16:12 ` David Stevens
2010-05-04 16:43 ` Brian Haley
2010-05-04 17:05 ` David Stevens
2010-05-04 21:39 ` David Miller
2010-05-04 21:38 ` David Miller
2010-05-04 21:46 ` David Miller
2010-05-04 22:26 ` enh
2010-05-04 23:07 ` David Miller
2010-05-05 15:36 ` Brian Haley
2010-05-05 22:00 ` David Miller
2010-05-06 1:50 ` Brian Haley
2010-05-06 7:10 ` David Miller
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=AANLkTingTdmhyJhENb9AYDjUT7m_-yQflw5-gJqIA9iw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=enh@google.com \
--cc=brian.haley@hp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--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).