On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 16:14:33 +0800
Zang MingJie wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:52 AM, Alexander Duyck
> wrote:
> > On 08/10/2015 04:50 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Zang MingJie writes:
> >>
> >>> Here comes several options:
> >>>
> >>> 1. reject local next hop
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:52 AM, Alexander Duyck
wrote:
> On 08/10/2015 04:50 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Zang MingJie writes:
>>
>>> Here comes several options:
>>>
>>> 1. reject local next hop w/ EINVAL
>>> 2. delete route when local next hop removed
>>
>> Will also cause
From: Alexander Duyck
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:52:27 -0700
> On 08/10/2015 04:50 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>>> 4. document it
>> I prefer that one :)
>
> Yeah, me too. The fact is things have worked this way up until now
> and I suspect the reason why this hasn't been reported until now
On 08/10/2015 04:50 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
Hello,
Zang MingJie writes:
Here comes several options:
1. reject local next hop w/ EINVAL
2. delete route when local next hop removed
Will also cause some people to complain.
3. transition between RT_SCOPE_HOST amd RT_SCOPE_LINK
I don'
Hello,
Zang MingJie writes:
> Here comes several options:
>
> 1. reject local next hop w/ EINVAL
> 2. delete route when local next hop removed
Will also cause some people to complain.
> 3. transition between RT_SCOPE_HOST amd RT_SCOPE_LINK
I don't understand the scope transition. I know Alex
Here comes several options:
1. reject local next hop w/ EINVAL
2. delete route when local next hop removed
3. transition between RT_SCOPE_HOST amd RT_SCOPE_LINK
4. document it
which one should we choose ?
1 will definitely cause compatibility problem
2 is the easiest solution
3 need a bit of cod
Hello,
Zang MingJie writes:
> Days ago I mistakenly set the gateway address on my box, then add the
> default router, after I deleted the address my box can't access
> Internet and all things looks fine. It takes me several hours to
> figure out it is an kernel bug.
I don't consider this a kerne
Days ago I mistakenly set the gateway address on my box, then add the
default router, after I deleted the address my box can't access
Internet and all things looks fine. It takes me several hours to
figure out it is an kernel bug.
>On Sat, Aug 8, 2015, 1:00 AM Hannes Frederic Sowa
>wrote:
>If we
Hello,
Alexander Duyck writes:
> On 08/07/2015 01:23 AM, Zang MingJie wrote:
>> IMO, the routing decision is determined, given a specific routing
>> table and local network the result MUST be determined, independence of
>> how/what order the routing entry is added.
>>
>> Now there are two ways to
On 08/07/2015 01:23 AM, Zang MingJie wrote:
IMO, the routing decision is determined, given a specific routing
table and local network the result MUST be determined, independence of
how/what order the routing entry is added.
Now there are two ways to configure the system resulting EXACTLY the
sam
IMO, the routing decision is determined, given a specific routing
table and local network the result MUST be determined, independence of
how/what order the routing entry is added.
Now there are two ways to configure the system resulting EXACTLY the
same routing table and local addresses, but the r
On 08/06/2015 03:13 AM, Zang MingJie wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Alexander Duyck
wrote:
On 08/05/2015 02:06 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
[ please cc netdev ]
On 08/05/2015 10:56 AM, Zang MingJie wrote:
Hi:
I found a bug when remove an ip address which is referenced by a routing
e
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Alexander Duyck
wrote:
> On 08/05/2015 02:06 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>>
>> [ please cc netdev ]
>>
>> On 08/05/2015 10:56 AM, Zang MingJie wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi:
>>>
>>> I found a bug when remove an ip address which is referenced by a routing
>>> entry.
>>>
>>> step
On 08/05/2015 02:06 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
[ please cc netdev ]
On 08/05/2015 10:56 AM, Zang MingJie wrote:
Hi:
I found a bug when remove an ip address which is referenced by a
routing entry.
step to reproduce:
ip li add type dummy
ip li set dummy0 up
ip ad add 10.0.0.1/24 dev dummy0
i
[ please cc netdev ]
On 08/05/2015 10:56 AM, Zang MingJie wrote:
Hi:
I found a bug when remove an ip address which is referenced by a routing entry.
step to reproduce:
ip li add type dummy
ip li set dummy0 up
ip ad add 10.0.0.1/24 dev dummy0
ip ad add 10.0.0.2/24 dev dummy0
ip ro add default
Hi:
I found a bug when remove an ip address which is referenced by a routing entry.
step to reproduce:
ip li add type dummy
ip li set dummy0 up
ip ad add 10.0.0.1/24 dev dummy0
ip ad add 10.0.0.2/24 dev dummy0
ip ro add default via 10.0.0.2/24
ip ad del 10.0.0.2/24 dev dummy0
after deleting the
16 matches
Mail list logo
