> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we already know that Quagga doesn't > look at IFF_UP on addresses. (It just looks at bge0, not at bge0:1 etc)
I just took a look at the 0.99.11 source. In interface_list_ioctl(), it calls SIOCGLIFCONF, walks each lifreq (*including* ones for logicals), ignores ones which are not IFF_UP, and tracks the rest. > > Along those lines, there may be more application capture by having IFF_UP > > mean "address is usable" and introducing a new flag such as "IFF_ADMUP" to > > indicate the address is administratively up (which is irrelevant to most > > applications, which instead just want to know whether an address they > > found via SIOCG[L]IFCONF is usable). > > Given that applications don't look at the flags on bge0:1, IFF_UP > doesn't seem to be useful there. IFF_ADMUP wouldn't be any more usable. I don't know how many other non-ON applications do what Quagga does, but given that logicals have been around for over a decade now, I wouldn't be surprised to see this. -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
