On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 06:45:15PM -0400, Anurag S. Maskey wrote: > > Renee Danson Sommerfeld wrote: >>> >>>>> code review for 10682 Need a policy / process for handling >>>>> duplicated (already used) addresses >>>>> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=10682 >>>>> >>>>> webrev is at >>>>> >>>>> http://zhadum.east/export/ws/am223141/temp/nwam1-work/webrev/ >>>>> >>>> ncu_ip.c, line 681: Do we know at this point that the DELADDR was for >>>> a v4 address? Even if that's the case, collisions are possible on v6 >>>> interfaces, as well, so we need these checks for both v4 and v6. I'm >>>> guessing we probably want to pull the af out of the sockaddr in the >>>> event data, rather than always using AF_INET. >>>> >>> IPv6 - always forgetting that. Thanks for pointing that out. I've >>> changed the protocol line to: >>> >>> intf.if_protocol = evm->data.if_state.addr.ss_family; >>> >> Looks good. >> >> [...] >> Since this is the first time we're doing it with NCUs, though, it's >> probably worth some extra testing. What's the recovery path? Need >> to make sure we come out of the state cleanly when appropriate. The >> two cases I can think of are >> >> - if the user fixes things by changing the (duplicate) static addr >> assigned to the ncu >> > Yes, when the User change the NCU, on commit the NCU is reread by nwamd > and the new address applied. >> - if the user fixes things by shutting down/correcting the other >> system. In this case, I think expecting a refresh of the nwam >> service is reasonable; need to make sure that clears things up. >> > This one I hadn't tested. It turns out that you're right. One the > address from the other machine disappears, we need to refresh nwam and > the new address is applied.
Sounds good to me. Thanks for running those tests! -renee >> Does that make sense? Have you already done all this and I'm rambling >> on needlessly? :-) >> >> > Only half of it ;) > > Anurag >
