Similar NM wonkiness going on in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/1176415
Regards, Jason On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa < han...@stressinduktion.org> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 06:59:56PM +0100, Tore Anderson wrote: > > * Hannes Frederic Sowa > > > > > The kernel should install the IPv6 address with /64 prefixlen without > also > > > installing a prefix route for that subnet. Currently the kernel does > this > > > automatically. > > > > I don't think you can do that from user-space. If you add a /64 (any > > > /128 really), you automatically get a on-link route too. At least I > > cannot spot how to do it in ip-address(8). So the only way to deal with > > the L=0 case when doing RA-processing in user-space is to add the > > address as a /128. > > Since the current kernel has extended ifa_flags to 32 bit it is now very > straightforward and easy to add such functionality (this was done for > NM correctly supporting privacy addresses). I already had this on my > todo list for some time but did not get to it. > > I still have to review how address and prefix route deletion should happen > if > this feature gets introduced. > > > Once you're doing that, it's probably easier to handle L=1 by simply > > adding the on-link route directly, rather than adding the address as a > > /64 and relying on the kernel to add the route for you. The two should > > result in the same functionality, though, so I'm don't really understand > > what's actually broken here. > > I guess it breaks generation of privacy addresses. > > But you are right, essentially it should work but some assumptions were > made in the kernel which should have been checked first. > > Greetings, > > Hannes > >