Sorry, but I don't think this patch is needed. It is OK to add a route with the RTF_EXPIRES flag set and rtmsg_info == 0. It's simply a route that expires straight away. So there is no inconsistency in allowing this.
I agree
In fact if anything we should find a way to export the RTF_EXPIRES flag in rt6_fill_node. As it is I don't see how the user can distinguish between a route that never expires versus a route that has just expired. Actually the rt6i_expires check in rt6_fill_node is wrong. It will cause a route that expires at jiffies == 0 (remember jiffies do wrap around) to show as a route that is either permanent or has just expired. It should be checking the RTF_EXPIRES flag instead.
Yes I see your point. Using RTF_EXPIRE flag should not be too hard since we have the route entry 'rt' in this function. Thanks, Jean-Mickael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
