Hi,
-Original Message-
From: Lennart Poettering [mailto:lenn...@poettering.net]
Sent: den 28 februari 2014 00:56
To: Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
Cc: systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH] sd-dhcp: implement IPv4 link-local
Hi,
-Original Message-
From: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [mailto:zbys...@in.waw.pl]
Sent: den 28 februari 2014 04:08
To: Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
Cc: systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH] sd-dhcp: implement IPv4 link-local
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog
umut.tezdu...@axis.com wrote:
If an IPv4LL address has been acquired, and then a DHCP server becomes
available, do we really want to drop the address entirely? At least for
IPv6 there's this concept of deprecated addresses for this
On Fri, 28.02.14 09:17, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog (umut.tezdu...@axis.com) wrote:
+} else if (ll-state == IPV4LL_STATE_WAITING_PROBE ||
+ ll-state == IPV4LL_STATE_PROBING ||
+ ll-state ==
+ IPV4LL_STATE_WAITING_ANNOUNCE)
On Fri, 28.02.14 09:05, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog (umut.tezdu...@axis.com) wrote:
Hmm, how is this hooked up in detail? i.e. when is the IPv4LL state machine
started? I think I'd like to see this started after a short while when no
DHCP
response is seen, and immediately stopped as soon as
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
If you stop LL state machine and start again, then you will go through
the probe/announce/defend process anyways. Tell you the truth I didn't
quite understand your question.
Well, in embedded environments
On Fri, 28.02.14 14:34, Tom Gundersen (t...@jklm.no) wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
If you stop LL state machine and start again, then you will go through
the probe/announce/defend process anyways. Tell you the truth I didn't
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Fri, 28.02.14 14:34, Tom Gundersen (t...@jklm.no) wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
If you stop LL state machine and start again, then you will go
Implements IPv4LL with respect to RFC 3927
(http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3927.txt) and integrates it
with networkd. Majority of the IPv4LL state machine is
taken from avahi (http://avahi.org/) project's autoip.
IPv4LL can be enabled by IPv4LL=yes under [Network]
section of .network file.
IPv4LL
This is a lot of code, and this approach is largely obsoleted by
link-local IPv6 addressing, which also has the benefits of being
simpler, deterministic (at least with RFC 4862), and collision-proof.
Both Apple [1] and Microsoft [2] prefer IPv6 link-local as the best
practice.
Is it really that
On Thu, 27.02.14 21:54, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog (umut.tezdu...@axis.com) wrote:
Implements IPv4LL with respect to RFC 3927
(http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3927.txt) and integrates it
with networkd. Majority of the IPv4LL state machine is
taken from avahi (http://avahi.org/) project's autoip.
On Thu, 27.02.14 14:28, David Timothy Strauss (da...@davidstrauss.net) wrote:
This is a lot of code, and this approach is largely obsoleted by
link-local IPv6 addressing, which also has the benefits of being
simpler, deterministic (at least with RFC 4862), and collision-proof.
Both Apple
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:28 PM, David Timothy Strauss
da...@davidstrauss.net wrote:
This is a lot of code, and this approach is largely obsoleted by
link-local IPv6 addressing, which also has the benefits of being
simpler, deterministic (at least with RFC 4862), and collision-proof.
Both
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 09:54:17PM +0100, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog wrote:
Implements IPv4LL with respect to RFC 3927
(http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3927.txt) and integrates it
with networkd. Majority of the IPv4LL state machine is
taken from avahi (http://avahi.org/) project's autoip.
IPv4LL
14 matches
Mail list logo
