Herbert Xu wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 03:14:57PM -0700, David Miller wrote: >>> No, the questions should really be: >>> >>> 1. Is IPV6 supported over this media type. >>> yes: got to 2 >>> no: stop >>> >>> 2. Is the device MTU >= IPV6_MIN_MTU >>> yes: continue >>> no: stop >>> >>> Autoconfiguration is a layer on top of IPv6. Whether it's enabled >>> or not should not dictate whether IPv6 addressed may be configured or not. >> Sounds good to me, patches? :-) > > I don't think we need any more patches since right now MTU >= IPV6_MIN_MTU > is the only condition we require before we allow IPv6 addresses to be added > to an interface. > > The original patch simply confused this basic IPv6 address support with > IPv6 autoconfiguration.
Looking over the history, Herbert has mostly right. The only concern I have is that it's currently permitted to configure IPv6 addresses on interface that would not have link-local addressing (ex: IEEE 1394 link). Now, is some circumstances that's ok (tuntap is a perfect example). In others, particularly where there is an "IPv6 over foo" spec, not so much. -vlad - 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
