Renee Danson Sommerfeld wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 04:40:46PM +0100, Alan Maguire wrote: > >> fresh webrev in place, I've retested and >> it seems to resolve all the issues described >> in 11437, 11092 and 10707. We're seeing >> some weirdness with DHCPv6 and autoconf >> that John has kindly spent some time investigating, >> this likely results from us having to rely on regular >> router advertisements rather than sending >> solicitations when IPv6 is plumbed. The same >> behaviour is observed outside of NWAM so it >> doesn't seem to be an NWAM-specific issue. >> >> One other weird thing we see on John's test machine - >> DHCPv4 takes a long time to respond sometimes >> (>60sec), despite nwamd doing the right thing in >> starting DHCP during the configuration phase. >> Webrev is at: >> >> http://zhadum.east/export/ws/amaguire/nwam1-fixes/webrev/ >> > > Two code organization nits and one real question: > > ncu.c, lines 213-225: You can pull the unplumb calls out of the if-else > statements, and then you only need the if conditionals for the > plumb calls. > > ncu_ip.c, lines 624-639: These could be consolidated to > if (ncu_online && up) { > ... > } else if (!ncu_online && !up) { > ... > } > > both accepted. > ncu_ip.c, lines 1074-1089: I'm a little confused here. At the beginning > of this functin, we got ifh by opening the specific lifnum that's > associated with addr. Now we're checking to make sure the address > that's on this handle matches addr. Won't this always be the case? > I'm probably missing something here... > > I had thought we had to deal with RTM_DELADDRs sometimes when the address had reappeared, but it turns out this isn't an issue, so I've ripped these changes out.
Thanks for the review! Alan
