On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 12:20:58AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Milan Kocian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:33:22 +0200 > > > ipv6 sends a RTM_DELLINK netlink message on both events: NETDEV_DOWN, > > NETDEV_UNREGISTER. Corrected by sending RTM_NEWLINK on NETDEV_DOWN event > > and RTM_DELLINK on NETDEV_UNREGISTER event. > > Why would we indicate that a new device has appeared on NETDEV_DOWN? > > I don't see any sense in saying "RTM_NEWLINK" for a removal, it's > for additions. > Sorry for my late reply. I was out.
Because RTM_NEWLINK is used to notify about device status change (as I see in net/core/rtnetlink.c) and RTM_DELLINK to inform about NETDEV_UNREGISTER. Why should it be else in ipv6 subsystem ? And userspace programs (quagga) suppose it. Now userspace get two rtnetlink's 'LINK' messages on 'ip l s down' event. First is RTM_NEWLINK from net/core/rtnetlink.c and second is RTM_DELLINK from ipv6. quagga story: On NEWLINK (flag IFF_UP is down) message quagga flushes all routes from RIB but leaves ip adresses. On DELLINK message q. flushes routes and addresses. On 'ip l s up' event ipv6 sends addresses and routes again but ipv4 not (it sends only routes). Thus q. stays without knowledge about ipv4's addresses after 'ip l s down/up' commands. git change: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=979ad663125af4be120697263038bb06ddbb83b4 So from this point of view I tried to synchronize types of messages on the same events. IMHO second possibility is to remove rtnetlink notification about NETDEV_DOWN/_UNREGISTER from ipv6 subsystem because it is duplicate message. regards, milon - 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
