From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Teran McKinney <sega01@gmail.com>
Subject: net.ipv6.conf.INT.accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen defaults to 0
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 06:38:49 +0200 (EET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.0902030632240.7583@netcore.fi> (raw)
Hello,
As reported and discussed below and in
<http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-ipv6@lists.debian.org/msg03753.html>,
to accept "route information option" on Linux, you have to manually
change accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen sysctl value. Other implementations
that I know of accept this by default.
Is it intentional that Route Information options are ignored by
default?
I suspect not -- if so, the default value should be (IMHO) 64 or if
that's disagreeable, 48.
Even if this is intentional, I think the intentions should be
revisited.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 17:24:00 +0000
From: Teran McKinney <sega01@gmail.com>
Reply-To: radvd Development Discussion <radvd-devel-l@litech.org>
To: radvd Development Discussion <radvd-devel-l@litech.org>
Subject: Re: [radvd-devel-l] Linux and specific routes
Hey,
I have finally obtained my answer. I ended up reading RFC 4191,
glancing at RFC 2461, and looking at Linux's source code, but found
what I was looking for. It turns out that "route information option"
is more precise than "specific routes", so I googled for it and found
that Linux supports it just fine; all you have to do is set
accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen to the maximum prefix length you want to
accept. <http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-ipv6@lists.debian.org/msg03753.html>
is very helpful.
Cheers and thanks,
Teran
On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 18:27, Arnaud Ebalard <arnaud.ebalard@eads.net> wrote:
>
> "Teran McKinney" <sega01@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I added the patch, but it does not seem to affect specific routes. I
>> was only using one router at first, but tried with an additional
>> router and had no luck. Specific routes just aren't been added :-(.
>> This configuration seems to work fine if manually added, so I'm not
>> sure what is wrong.
>
> If you compiled the kernel with the support and enabled the /proc
> entries to activate the feature, then it looks like a bug. Maybe you
> could drop a mail to the author of the patch.
>
> Cheers,
>
> a+
>
> --
> radvd-devel-l mailing list : radvd-devel-l@litech.org
> http://lists.litech.org/listinfo/radvd-devel-l
>
--
radvd-devel-l mailing list : radvd-devel-l@litech.org
http://lists.litech.org/listinfo/radvd-devel-l
next reply other threads:[~2009-02-03 4:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-03 4:38 Pekka Savola [this message]
2009-02-03 5:36 ` net.ipv6.conf.INT.accept_ra_rt_info_max_plen defaults to 0 David Miller
2009-02-15 14:05 ` Teran McKinney
2009-02-16 6:31 ` Pekka Savola
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=alpine.LRH.2.00.0902030632240.7583@netcore.fi \
--to=pekkas@netcore.fi \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sega01@gmail.com \
/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