On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 01:24:40PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 10:43:45PM -0500, Amos Waterland wrote: > > The difference between ip=off and ip=::::::off has been a cause of much > > confusion. Document how each behaves, and do not contradict ourselves > > by saying that "off" is the default when in fact "any" is the default > > and is descibed as being so lower in the file. > > Is that really how it works? If so it sounds a bit silly to me. > Surely it would be desirable for ip=off and ip=::::::off to > do the same thing. Or am I missing the point?
Yes, that is how it works. Pretty confusing, so I figured I'd better send in a patch to document it. In the ip=::::::off case, the code in ip_auto_config() sees that ic_enable is asserted but that ic_myaddr is NONE and proceeds to do autoconfiguration. I'd welcome comments from people on whether we should change how it works instead of just document it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
