Hi,
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:26:53PM +0100, Karsten Keil wrote:
Reading the section you reference, we do follow all the MUST requirements,
and
we log an error. Given that the disable section is a SHOULD, I think we
can at
least be somewhat more restrictive in our implementation.
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 03:32:12PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
From: Karsten Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:36:56 +0100
If the address is a link-local address formed from an interface
identifier based on the hardware address, which is supposed to be
uniquely
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 04:09:57PM -0500, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
Neil Horman wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 01:38:57AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:36:56 +0100), Karsten
Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
So I think we should disable the
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 04:36:56PM +0100, Karsten Keil wrote:
Hi,
I tried to run the 1.5.0 Beta2 TAHI Selftest on recent Linux kernel.
It fails in the Stateless Address Autoconfiguration section with
6 tests.
These tests are for Duplicate Address Detection (DAD).
They are detect for the
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:36:56 +0100), Karsten
Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
So I think we should disable the interface now, if DAD fails on a
hardware based LLA.
I don't want to do this, at least, unconditionally.
Options (not exclusive):
- we could have
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:38:57 +0900 (JST)),
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
- we could have dad_reaction interface variable and
1: disable interface
= 1: disable IPv6
0: ignore (as we do now)
Argh, 0, 0 and 0, maybe.
--yoshfuji
--
To
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 01:38:57AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:36:56 +0100), Karsten
Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
So I think we should disable the interface now, if DAD fails on a
hardware based LLA.
I don't want to do
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 11:17:48AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 04:36:56PM +0100, Karsten Keil wrote:
Hi,
I tried to run the 1.5.0 Beta2 TAHI Selftest on recent Linux kernel.
It fails in the Stateless Address Autoconfiguration section with
6 tests.
These tests
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 01:40:51AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:38:57 +0900 (JST)),
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
- we could have dad_reaction interface variable and
1: disable interface
= 1: disable
Neil Horman wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 01:38:57AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:36:56 +0100), Karsten Keil
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
So I think we should disable the interface now, if DAD fails on a
hardware based LLA.
I don't
From: Karsten Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:36:56 +0100
If the address is a link-local address formed from an interface
identifier based on the hardware address, which is supposed to be
uniquely assigned (e.g., EUI-64 for an Ethernet interface), IP
operation on
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:32:12 -0800 (PST)),
David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
I question any RFC mandate that shuts down IP communication on a node
because of packets received from remote systems.
RFC4862 tell us that we SHOULD disable IP communication.
(IP
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:46:55 +0900 (JST)
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:32:12 -0800 (PST)),
David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
I question any RFC mandate that shuts down IP communication on a node
because of
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:55:44 -0800 (PST)),
David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:
Because of the above, the existing behavior must still stay the
default. I hope this is your plan.
By default Linux will not implement this SHOULD, it's a security
issue.
Yes so
14 matches
Mail list logo
