Hi Sean,
See embedded commentsŠ
Thanks,
Robert
On 3/4/14 3:25 PM, Collins, Sean sean_colli...@cable.comcast.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 02:08:03PM EST, Robert Li (baoli) wrote:
Hi Xu Han Sean,
Is this code going to be committed as it is? Based on this morning's
discussion, I
Hi Robert,
I'm reaching out to you off-list for this:
On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:48:46AM EST, Robert Li (baoli) wrote:
As a result of this change, it will end up having two LLA addresses in the
router's qr interface. It would have made more sense if the LLA will be
replacing the qr
Hi Sean,
Sorry for your frustration. I actually provided the comments about the two
LLAs in the review (see patch set 1). If the intent for these changes is
to allow RAs from legitimate sources only, I'm afraid that that goal won't
be reached with them. I may be completely wrong, but so far I
Hi Xu Han Sean,
Is this code going to be committed as it is? Based on this morning's
discussion, I thought that the IP address used to install the RA rule
comes from the qr-xxx interface's LLA address. I think that I'm confused.
Also this bug: Allow LLA as router interface of IPv6 subnet
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 02:08:03PM EST, Robert Li (baoli) wrote:
Hi Xu Han Sean,
Is this code going to be committed as it is? Based on this morning's
discussion, I thought that the IP address used to install the RA rule
comes from the qr-xxx interface's LLA address. I think that I'm
