On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:51:05 +0800 Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 02:52:43PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > The tap devices have to have addresses don't they. So bringing up an empty > > bridge is meaningless. If you just add the device first then it will work. > > Actually bringing up a bridge with no constituents is useful for > a bridge that's made up of only virtual interfaces. Since each > vritual interface may be created or destroyed at run-time it'd > be quite awkward to check every time to see if that's the last > or first and act differently on the bridge. > > More importantly constiuents can be added to and removed from a > bridge without taking it down. > > > Could be fixed to prevent errors from existing scripts but it is not a > > complete showstopper. > > Well this stops FC8 working with Xen so for that it's a showstopper :) > > > The problem is that when device is brought up it propogates events up to > > other layers and applications, these layers will then query and see a bogus > > address. > > What exactly would it break for this scenario though? Well with earlier kernels, ipv6 and others would see an invalid address (all zeros). That could be a problem if some netlink watching program or udev script propagated that value into a database or management interface. But now using a random value, that won't happen. -- Stephen Hemminger <[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
