From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: restoring IP multicast addresses when restarting the interface. Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:00:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20120424.170004.1811627706738841106.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20120420212533.78903e3a@asterix.rh> <20120423121425.GA29883@gondor.apana.org.au> <20120424153023.0913956e@asterix.rh> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: fbl@redhat.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([198.137.202.13]:43030 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756930Ab2DXVAP (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:00:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20120424153023.0913956e@asterix.rh> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Flavio Leitner Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:30:23 -0300 > On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 22:14:25 +1000 > Herbert Xu wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:25:33PM -0300, Flavio Leitner wrote: >> > >> > Although the new behavior seems nice and save some user space >> > work, I think it was unintentional and likely to be a bug. >> > >> > What you guys think? >> >> Are you talking about multicast subscriptions on the interface? > > Yes. > >> I don't see why they should disappear when the interface goes >> down and then comes back up since these ultimately come from >> application sockets which continue to exist after a down/up. > > Yeah, but that's not how things used to work before, so my > question is if the kernel should be responsible for keeping > the subscription or the application. > > If the admin puts down the interface and remove the module, > for instance, then the multicast subscription is gone. > Should the application monitor for that then? > > David? Any thoughts? David Stevens at IBM and Herbert at the current multicast experts, so I will defer to them.