> > The MIB also specifies tentative(6) and duplicate(7) as distinct > > values. So one solution (if we want to strictly adhere to rfc 4293) > > is to have libipadm return > > preferred(1), <-> default value (see CR 6832315) > > deprecated(2), <-> IFF_DEPRECATED > > invalid(3), <-> ~IFF_UP on the address (also covers DAD > > failed) > > I think either we need a new IFF_INVALID or we rely on in.ndpd deleting > an address when it becomes invalid so we never return 3. > > > inaccessible(4), <-> ~IFF_DOWN on the interface > > But it would be good to have a separate flag for this, since it allows > the case when the IP interface goes missing but we want to keep the > address objects around. Thus IFF_INACCESSIBLE. > > Note that it might make sense to have an IFF_MISSING for the IP > interface, and in that case we could have IFF_MISSING on the addresses > to mean inaccessible.
While I have no objection to introducing new IFF_* flags, we must assume that no applications will bother to concern themselves with them. (Another thing we learned in spades with the original IPMP implementation via things like IFF_NOFAILOVER.) Along those lines, there may be more application capture by having IFF_UP mean "address is usable" and introducing a new flag such as "IFF_ADMUP" to indicate the address is administratively up (which is irrelevant to most applications, which instead just want to know whether an address they found via SIOCG[L]IFCONF is usable). -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
