In article <200210091903.XAA20130@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Wed, 9 Oct 2002 23:03:29
+0400 (MSD)), kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx says:
> > Personally I think the interfaces should be configured with a /64 but
> > there should be a discard route for the whole /10.
>
> I agressively agree. :-)
How about this (against 2.4.19 / 2.4.20-pre10)?
Index: net/ipv6/addrconf.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/usagi/usagi-backport/linux24/net/ipv6/addrconf.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1.20.1
diff -u -r1.1.1.1.20.1 addrconf.c
--- net/ipv6/addrconf.c 2002/09/27 17:17:06 1.1.1.1.20.1
+++ net/ipv6/addrconf.c 2002/10/09 18:18:34
@@ -783,6 +783,7 @@
struct in6_addr addr;
ipv6_addr_set(&addr, __constant_htonl(0xFE800000), 0, 0, 0);
+ addrconf_prefix_route(&addr, 10, dev, 0, RTF_ADDRCONF|RTF_REJECT);
addrconf_prefix_route(&addr, 64, dev, 0, RTF_ADDRCONF);
}
--
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
GPG FP: 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF 80D8 4807 F894 E062 0EEA
|