Andy Gospodarek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 02:25:19PM -0500, Brian Haley wrote:
[...]
>> So forgive my naive question, but what would it take to make IPv6 work?
>> I know DAD fails on a test setup I have, but I haven't dug-into why
>> this is (I can guess), and I'd like to see it working. I'm willing to
>> help, even if just to get it limping along.
>>
>
>Brian,
>
>If we are easily able to differentiate between the multicast addresses
>in the mc_list as to which are for ipv4 and which are for ipv6 then it
>would be easy to call-out to something in the ipv6 mcast code when
>needed instead of always calling out to ipv4 code.
Which covers multicast (at least for the failover case; I think
the regular support is already pretty address-independent).
Additionally, the IP address tracking for the ARP monitor
(bond_glean_dev_ip) needs IPv6 address support. I seem to recall that
there's an issue with the slaves each getting separate link local
addresses automatically assigned, but I haven't fooled with that in a
while. There are likely other problems that would crop up during
serious testing.
A characterization of what the IPv6 related problems are would
be a good place to start; I would expect that active-backup mode without
arp_monitor shouldn't be too difficult to make operable.
-J
---
-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
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
