Hi,
This is queued up for consideration for round-8. Little question (which
is a resend):
On Fri, 11 Dec 2015, Donald Sharp wrote:
@@ -529,6 +537,25 @@ nexthop_active_ipv6 (struct rib *rib, struct nexthop
*nexthop, int set,
if (CHECK_FLAG(nexthop->flags, NEXTHOP_FLAG_FILTERED))
return 0;
+ /*
+ * Check to see if we should trust the passed in information
+ * for UNNUMBERED interfaces as that we won't find the GW
+ * address in the routing table.
+ */
+ if (CHECK_FLAG(nexthop->flags, NEXTHOP_FLAG_ONLINK))
+ {
+ ifp = if_lookup_by_index (nexthop->ifindex);
+ if (ifp && connected_is_unnumbered(ifp))
+ {
+ if (if_is_operative(ifp))
+ return 1;
+ else
+ return 0;
+ }
+ else
+ return 0;
+ }
# it appears it intends that NEXTHOP_FLAG_ONLINK set be terminal, i.e.
# that the function must return if it enters this block. In which
# case, it should end with an unconditional return, shouldn't it?
#
# also, why is nexthop_active_ipv6 different on that check from
# nexthop_active_ipv4? Latter doesn't have it?
regards,
--
Paul Jakma | [email protected] | @pjakma | Key ID: 0xD86BF79464A2FF6A
Fortune:
Someday somebody has got to decide whether the typewriter is the machine,
or the person who operates it.
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
