On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Erik Kline wrote:
> Upon further reflection, doesn't the whole premise of this change
> means that it's no longer possible to selectively disable these
> features if they are set on "all"? Or are we saying that this mode is
> only support with "default" enable + "
On 28 September 2017 at 13:47, Erik Kline wrote:
>> Erik, please review.
>
> I apologize for the delay. I see that you've already applied this, and
> it's mostly LGTM except I have one thing I'm not seeing clearly.
>
> The documentation accept_dad now claims:
>
> DAD operation and mode on a g
> Erik, please review.
I apologize for the delay. I see that you've already applied this, and
it's mostly LGTM except I have one thing I'm not seeing clearly.
The documentation accept_dad now claims:
DAD operation and mode on a given interface will be selected according
to the maximum v
From: Matteo Croce
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 17:46:37 +0200
> Currently, writing into
> net.ipv6.conf.all.{accept_dad,use_optimistic,optimistic_dad} has no effect.
> Fix handling of these flags by:
>
> - using the maximum of global and per-interface values for the
> accept_dad flag. That is, if a
From: Matteo Croce
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 17:46:37 +0200
> Currently, writing into
> net.ipv6.conf.all.{accept_dad,use_optimistic,optimistic_dad} has no effect.
> Fix handling of these flags by:
>
> - using the maximum of global and per-interface values for the
> accept_dad flag. That is, if a
Currently, writing into
net.ipv6.conf.all.{accept_dad,use_optimistic,optimistic_dad} has no effect.
Fix handling of these flags by:
- using the maximum of global and per-interface values for the
accept_dad flag. That is, if at least one of the two values is
non-zero, enable DAD on the interfac