netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fan Du <fan.du@windriver.com>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
Cc: <davem@davemloft.net>, <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>,
	<yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>, <jmorris@namei.org>,
	<steffen.klassert@secunet.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next V2] net: split rt_genid for ipv4 and ipv6
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:12:55 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51EF8C87.4060707@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130723020437.GC30719@order.stressinduktion.org>

Hallo Hannes

On 2013年07月23日 10:04, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 09:37:00AM +0800, Fan Du wrote:
>> Current net name space has only one genid for both IPv4 and IPv6, it has below drawbacks:
>>
>> - Add/delete an IPv4 address will invalidate all IPv6 routing table entries.
>> - Insert/remove XFRM policy will also invalidate both IPv4/IPv6 routing table entries
>>    even when the policy is only applied for one address family.
>>
>> Thus, this patch attempt to split one genid for two to cater for IPv4 and IPv6 separately
>> in a fine granularity.
>
> For me the approach seems reasonable. We should double-check if this
> does not affect v4mapped af_inet6 sockets in any way. I could help to
> do the review if there is an agreement that the split is desirable.

Thank you for your attention :)

v4mapped af_inet6 address shouldn't cause problem, as long as the mapped
v4 address is routable in IPv4 stack, so add/delete IPv6 address doesn't
interfere IPv4 routing entry.

> Thanks,
>
>    Hannes
>
>

-- 
浮沉随浪只记今朝笑

--fan

  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-24  8:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-23  1:37 Fan Du
2013-07-23  2:04 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-07-24  8:12   ` Fan Du [this message]
2013-07-23 21:51 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2013-07-24  1:30   ` Fan Du

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=51EF8C87.4060707@windriver.com \
    --to=fan.du@windriver.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
    --cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
    --cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH net-next V2] net: split rt_genid for ipv4 and ipv6' \
    /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

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).