On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 04:18:17PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Dan Williams
> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:07:00 -0600
>
> > Also, disable_ipv4 signals *intent*, which is distinct from current
> > state.
> >
> > Does an interface without an IPv4 address mean that the user wished it
> > not
From: Dan Williams
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:07:00 -0600
> Also, disable_ipv4 signals *intent*, which is distinct from current
> state.
>
> Does an interface without an IPv4 address mean that the user wished it
> not to have one?
>
> Or does it mean that DHCP hasn't started yet (but is
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 18:04 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Dan Williams
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:22:00 -0600
>
> > In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
> > they move to IPv6.
>
> I definitely don't.
>
> I've been lightly following this conversation and I have
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:12 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings
> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
>
>> You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
>> NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doing
>> this; it was also done on the
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:12 PM, David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote:
From: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doing
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 18:04 -0500, David Miller wrote:
From: Dan Williams d...@redhat.com
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:22:00 -0600
In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
they move to IPv6.
I definitely don't.
I've been lightly following this conversation and I
From: Dan Williams d...@redhat.com
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:07:00 -0600
Also, disable_ipv4 signals *intent*, which is distinct from current
state.
Does an interface without an IPv4 address mean that the user wished it
not to have one?
Or does it mean that DHCP hasn't started yet (but is
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 04:18:17PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
From: Dan Williams d...@redhat.com
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:07:00 -0600
Also, disable_ipv4 signals *intent*, which is distinct from current
state.
Does an interface without an IPv4 address mean that the user wished it
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 02:01:59AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 19:12 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Ben Hutchings
> > Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
> >
> > > You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
> > > NAT64 and DNS64 at the
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 19:12 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings
> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
>
> > You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
> > NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doing
> > this; it was also done
From: Ben Hutchings
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
> You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
> NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doing
> this; it was also done on the main FOSDEM wireless network this year.
This seems to be
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 18:04 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Dan Williams
> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:22:00 -0600
>
> > In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
> > they move to IPv6.
>
> I definitely don't.
>
> I've been lightly following this conversation and I have
From: Dan Williams
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:22:00 -0600
> In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
> they move to IPv6.
I definitely don't.
I've been lightly following this conversation and I have to say
a few things.
disable_ipv6 was added because people wanted to
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> My use-case would simply be to have an analogue for the disable_ipv6
> case. In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
> they move to IPv6. If you don't have something like disable_ipv4, then
> there's no way to
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 12:31 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
> > perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
> > use it too :)
>
> Sure, can you
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 12:31 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
use it too :)
Sure, can
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
My use-case would simply be to have an analogue for the disable_ipv6
case. In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
they move to IPv6. If you don't have something like disable_ipv4, then
there's no
From: Dan Williams d...@redhat.com
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:22:00 -0600
In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
they move to IPv6.
I definitely don't.
I've been lightly following this conversation and I have to say
a few things.
disable_ipv6 was added because people
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 18:04 -0500, David Miller wrote:
From: Dan Williams d...@redhat.com
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:22:00 -0600
In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as
they move to IPv6.
I definitely don't.
I've been lightly following this conversation and I
From: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doing
this; it was also done on the main FOSDEM wireless network this year.
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 19:12 -0500, David Miller wrote:
From: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
NAT64 and DNS64 at the border. I believe some mobile networks are doing
this; it was
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 02:01:59AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 19:12 -0500, David Miller wrote:
From: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:02:00 +
You can run an internal network, or access network, as v6-only with
NAT64 and DNS64 at
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> Check this how current Xen scripts does routed networking:
>
> http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Networking#Associating_routes_with_virtual_devices
>
> Note, there are no bridges involved here! As the above page says, the
> backend has to have IP
On 20/02/14 20:39, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez also wrote:
Zoltan has noted though some use cases of IPv4 or IPv6 addresses on
backends though <...>
As
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Zoltan Kiss zoltan.k...@citrix.com wrote:
Check this how current Xen scripts does routed networking:
http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_Networking#Associating_routes_with_virtual_devices
Note, there are no bridges involved here! As the above page says, the
backend
On 20/02/14 20:39, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Zoltan Kiss zoltan.k...@citrix.com wrote:
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez also wrote:
Zoltan has noted though some use cases of IPv4 or IPv6 addresses on
backends
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez also wrote:
Zoltan has noted though some use cases of IPv4 or IPv6 addresses on
backends though <...>
>>
>> As discussed in the other threads
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
> perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
> use it too :)
Sure, can you describe a little better the use case, as I could use
that for the commit
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
use it too :)
Sure, can you describe a little better the use case, as I could use
that for
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Zoltan Kiss zoltan.k...@citrix.com wrote:
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez also wrote:
Zoltan has noted though some use cases of IPv4 or IPv6 addresses on
backends though ...
As discussed in the other threads
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 01:58 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:56:17PM -0600, Dan Williams wrote:
> > Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
> > perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
> > use it too :)
>
> Do you
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:56:17PM -0600, Dan Williams wrote:
> Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
> perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
> use it too :)
Do you plan to implement
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 09:20 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R.
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
From: "Luis R.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> >> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
>> >>
>> >> Some
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:19:15 -0800
> "Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote:
>
>> Sure, but note that the both disable_ipv6 and accept_dada sysctl
>> parameters are global. ipv4 and ipv6 interfaces are created upon
>> NETDEVICE_REGISTER, which will
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
> >>
> >> Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
> >> addresses, so
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Stephen Hemminger
step...@networkplumber.org wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:19:15 -0800
Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@do-not-panic.com wrote:
Sure, but note that the both disable_ipv6 and accept_dada sysctl
parameters are global. ipv4 and ipv6 interfaces are created
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
From: Luis R. Rodriguez
On 19/02/14 17:20, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R.
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 09:20 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 13:19 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:56:17PM -0600, Dan Williams wrote:
Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
use it too :)
Do you plan to implement
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sunset4-noipv4/?
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 01:58 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:56:17PM -0600, Dan Williams wrote:
Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was
perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can
use it too :)
Do you plan to
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:19:15 -0800
"Luis R. Rodriguez" wrote:
> Sure, but note that the both disable_ipv6 and accept_dada sysctl
> parameters are global. ipv4 and ipv6 interfaces are created upon
> NETDEVICE_REGISTER, which will get triggered when a driver calls
> register_netdev(). The goal of
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
>>
>> Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
>> addresses, so enable an option to specify this. One
>> example where this is observed are
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Dan Williams d...@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
addresses, so enable an option to specify this. One
example where
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:19:15 -0800
Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@do-not-panic.com wrote:
Sure, but note that the both disable_ipv6 and accept_dada sysctl
parameters are global. ipv4 and ipv6 interfaces are created upon
NETDEVICE_REGISTER, which will get triggered when a driver calls
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
>
> Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
> addresses, so enable an option to specify this. One
> example where this is observed are virtualization
> backend interfaces which just use the
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 18:59 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
addresses, so enable an option to specify this. One
example where this is observed are virtualization
backend interfaces which just use
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
addresses, so enable an option to specify this. One
example where this is observed are virtualization
backend interfaces which just use the net_device
constructs to help with their respective frontends.
This should
From: Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com
Some interfaces do not need to have any IPv4 or IPv6
addresses, so enable an option to specify this. One
example where this is observed are virtualization
backend interfaces which just use the net_device
constructs to help with their respective frontends.
52 matches
Mail list logo
