first I'd like to notice that we are speaking about obsoleted interfaces.
Yup, that's why you don't see me commenting on your other commits around
ia_netmask stuff, do you ?
snip
Back to your comments:
I have made a test case that proves, that usage of deleted address isn't
prevented
Qing,
first I'd like to notice that we are speaking about obsoleted interfaces.
This should be taken into account during all the discussion. We shouldn't
make code more complex in favor to make obsoleted interfaces more smart.
1) Scrubbing in in_ifinit() is done only in case of SIOCSIFADDR.
Author: glebius
Date: Mon Nov 21 14:10:13 2011
New Revision: 227791
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/227791
Log:
Historically in_control() did not check sockaddrs supplied with
structs ifreq/in_aliasreq and there've been several panics due
to that problem. All these panics were
Logically speaking the prefix route should not be removed until all of the
address related housing keeping tasks have been completed successfully.
Putting in_scrubprefix() at the top does not gain you anything at
all, but can
potentially be problematic if additional tasks are in fact performed
in
Qing,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 08:23:31AM -0800, Qing Li wrote:
Q Logically speaking the prefix route should not be removed until all of the
Q address related housing keeping tasks have been completed successfully.
From my point of view logically speaking, we should first remove route,
then
From my point of view logically speaking, we should first remove route,
then remove address. Otherwise, for a short time we've got an invalid
route in table.
For a short time you have an invalid address, it is faster to remove the
address from the list to prevent usage, then to flush the
