[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Improvement of Source Address Selection

To: pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx (Pekka Savola)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Improvement of Source Address Selection
From: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:37:33 +0400 (MSD)
Cc: davem@xxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, usagi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209280813030.8846-100000@xxxxxxxxxx> from "Pekka Savola" at Sep 28, 2 08:24:58 am
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx

> Or would you have an already-sorted list of possible candidate addresses 
> for each route in the order of preference?

I am not mad yet. :-)

What preference? You must select _one_ address, you do not need lost

> And recalculate always when address changes?

What address? Interface address? Routing tables used to be synchronized
to this.

> This is IMO a wrong approach from user's perspective.  Perhaps not if the 
> algorithm was run and e.g. additional, temporary "address selection" 
> routes were created by kernel.
> > > (stuff that's network prefix -independent
> > 
> > I am sorry, I feel I do not understand what you mean.
> Hmm.. this depends on the interpretation of the concept above.  If the
> list is refreshed always when addresses change or change state, this could
> perhaps work..

I am afraid I do not understand what "address", "state", "temporary" routes
etc you mean. It remained in your brains. :-)

Pekka, are you not going to sleep? (I am.) I bet when you reread this tomorrow,
you will not blame that my brains eventually falled to "parse error" loop. :-)


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>