From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: phil@nwl.cc, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] net: ipv6: use common fib_default_rule_pref
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 20:46:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150902184606.GC20527@pox.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150902.113439.1914221451599696711.davem@davemloft.net>
On 09/02/15 at 11:34am, David Miller wrote:
> From: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>
> Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:03:12 +0200
>
> > This switches IPv6 policy routing to use the shared
> > fib_default_rule_pref() function of IPv4 and DECnet. It is also used in
> > multicast routing for IPv4 as well as IPv6.
> >
> > The motivation for this patch is a complaint about iproute2 behaving
> > inconsistent between IPv4 and IPv6 when adding policy rules: Formerly,
> > IPv6 rules were assigned a fixed priority of 0x3FFF whereas for IPv4 the
> > assigned priority value was decreased with each rule added.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>
>
> All ->default_pref() methods are therefore going to be set to the
> default, so just kill off the method entirely and call
> fib_default_rule_pref() directly.
How strict are we with regard to compatibility here? New IPv6 rules
with no pref specified currently get appended at the end of the list
whereas this would start inserting at the head.
I'm absolutely in favour of the new behaviour but this could break
scripts which do not have proper prefs specified.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-02 18:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-02 13:03 [net-next PATCH] net: ipv6: use common fib_default_rule_pref Phil Sutter
2015-09-02 18:34 ` David Miller
2015-09-02 18:46 ` Thomas Graf [this message]
2015-09-03 11:10 ` [net-next PATCH] net: kill default_pref field of struct fib_rules_ops Phil Sutter
2015-09-06 5:00 ` David Miller
2015-09-06 9:54 ` Phil Sutter
2015-09-06 10:20 ` [net-next PATCH v2] net: ipv6: use common fib_default_rule_pref Phil Sutter
2015-09-09 5:37 ` David Miller
2015-09-09 5:38 ` David Miller
2015-09-09 11:45 ` Phil Sutter
2015-09-09 12:20 ` [net-next PATCH v3] " Phil Sutter
2015-09-09 21:22 ` 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=20150902184606.GC20527@pox.localdomain \
--to=tgraf@suug.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phil@nwl.cc \
/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).