YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Thu, 22 Jun 2006 00:57:56 +0200), Lukasz > Stelmach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says: > >> Lukasz Stelmach wrote: >>> Lukasz Stelmach wrote: [....] >> >> fd24:6f44:46bd:face:EUI64 fd24:6f44:46bd:face:RANDOM >> and >> 2002:531f:d667:face:EUI64 2002:531f:d667:face::RANDOM >> >> there seem to be no way to prefere 2002:: over fc00:: in rule 7 and it will >> be >> selected as long as it is before 2002:: on the list. I can see here that an >> implicit assumption has been made that an interface either is multihomed or >> "private". The seventh rule should not IMHO break the whole process of >> selection but rather mark as selectable all "private" (random) addresses. And >> it should rather be done before rule 6. > > Hmm? We do not have such intention. > In above case, when you connect to 2001:200:0:8002:203:47ff:fea5:3085, > either 2002:531f:d667:face:EUI64 or 2002:531f:d667:face::RANDOM > should be selected (depending on if use_tempaddr >= 2), > by the longest matching rule (Rule 8).
I've chewd the code line by line and it tastes like it should work the way you say... OK I see the problem. I've used ifconfig which doesn't show "deprecated" flag and "valid"/"prefered" times which, combined with "privacy", *seem* to cause some problems . I don't know yet if it is a problem of proper intervals in radvd.conf or is there still a bug in kernel. I'll let you know when I learn it. OK. That's enough for now. Let me get back to the real work ;-) Best regards. -- Było mi bardzo miło. Czwarta pospolita klęska, [...] >Łukasz< Już nie katolicka lecz złodziejska. (c)PP
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
