On Sat, 2025-11-15 at 14:02 +0100, Garri Djavadyan wrote: > On Mon, 2025-11-10 at 17:54 +0100, Fernando Fernandez Mancera wrote: > > > > > > On 10/25/25 11:21 PM, Garri Djavadyan wrote: > > > On Sat, 2025-10-25 at 16:53 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > > > Hi Garri, > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 01:39:02AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 00:12:40 +0200 > > > > > Garri Djavadyan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > A year ago I noticed a problem with handling ipv6_route > > > > > > flags > > > > > > that in > > > > > > some scenarios can lead to reachability issues. It was > > > > > > reported > > > > > > here: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=219205 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also it was recently reported in the Debian tracker after > > > > > > checking if > > > > > > the latest Debian stable is still affected: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1117959 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, the Debian team cannot act on the report > > > > > > because > > > > > > no one > > > > > > from the upstream kernel team has confirmed if the report > > > > > > in > > > > > > the > > > > > > upstream tracker is valid or not. Therefore, I am checking > > > > > > if > > > > > > anyone > > > > > > can help confirm if the observed behavior is indeed a bug. > > > > > > > > > > > > Many thanks in advance! > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Garri > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Linux networking does not actively use kernel bugzilla. > > > > > I forward the reports to the mailing list, that is all. > > > > > After than sometimes developers go back and update bugzilla > > > > > but it is not required or expected. > > > > > > > > Garri, best action would likely be to really post your full > > > > report on > > > > netdev directly. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Salvatore > > > > > > > > > Thank you for your suggestions Stephen and Salvatore. > > > > > > Below is the full report that was originally posted to the kernel > > > bugzilla a year ago. It is still reproducible with fresher > > > kernels. > > > > > > -----BEGIN REPORT----- > > > I noticed that the ipv6_route flags RTF_ADDRCONF and > > > RTF_PREFIX_RT > > > are > > > not cleared when static on-link routes are added during IPv6 > > > address > > > configuration, and it leads to situations when the kernel updates > > > the > > > static on-link routes with expiration time. > > > > > > > This is indeed a bug, I have a patch already and I am doing some > > testing > > before sending it to net.git. I hope it can be sent tomorrow. > > > > Thanks, > > Fernando. > > > For the record, Fernando submitted the patch for review to net-next: > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/[email protected]/ > > > Regards, > Garri
The patch has landed on linux-next: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=f72514b3c5698e4b900b25345e09f9ed33123de6 Salvatore, could you please clarify a few questions to which I could not find clear answers in the Debian Linux kernel handbook? - Should the patch first make it to the mainline or stable upstream trees before it is considered for acceptance in the Debian trees? - Will it be acceptable for both stable and oldstable Debian releases to include the fix considering that it can be seen as a security issue in some corner cases? Thank you. Regards, Garri
