From: Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 15:36:41 +0200
We currently take the first address from the interface which is scope
link or higher.
Historically, the global scope address would of been used, but my
previous fix, which stopped it taking a global scope address from a
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:01:10PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
From: Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 15:36:41 +0200
We currently take the first address from the interface which is scope
link or higher.
Historically, the global scope address would of been used, but my
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 09:31:58PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
From: Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:09:24 +0200
This is RFC because i personally don't know if this is the best fix.
The patch restores previous behavior, while still keeping the bug fix.
It is not
From: Andrew Lunn and...@lunn.ch
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:09:24 +0200
This is RFC because i personally don't know if this is the best fix.
The patch restores previous behavior, while still keeping the bug fix.
It is not obvious what is the correct source address for an IGMP
message when an
Patch 6a21165480a0 (net: ipv4: route: Fix sending IGMP messages with
link address) changed the way the source address of an IGMP message
was determined. Before that patch, a global scope addresses would be
used from another interface, if there was no global scope address on
the outgoing interface.
