On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 11:04:25AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 07:06:21PM +1000, Anand Kumria wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:28:24PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > It would be helpful if the program were to monitor the configuration of > > > the interface and only bring up a zeroconf address in the absence of any > > > other configuration (though if it were to do this it ought to look out > > > It is explicitly okay to have an interface with both a IPv4 routable > > address and an IPv4 link-local > > It is possible but this behaviour is discouraged: the main reason for > doing it is when failing over from a zeroconf address to an allocated > one (for example, when a DHCP server becomes avaliable). I do believe > the RFC recommends this behaviour and it's mostly how the Apple and > Microsoft implementations appear to behave (see the appendix in the > RFC).
Actually I read it entirely the other way -- the RFC recommends *against* doing it the way that has been done on these platforms. > Because of this I do feel allocating an address when another is > present ought to be at most optional behaviour. Hmm, I'll have a think about how to make that something that can be tweaked. > Allocating a route without an address is more useful since it allows > communication with zeroconfed devices even when the system is explicitly > configured (for example, statically) so I can see that usefully being > done separately. Perhaps as another option, perhaps non-optionally. I'll certainly keep that in mind. > > If you know of any way I can programatically determine whether a > > specific interface will use ARP to do hardware <-> IP address > > resoultion, I'm certainly interested. > > You can determine the link type of the interface from the kernel (it is > displayed as link/ether or whatever by 'ip link') and select specific > interface types you know do ARP. That's not 100% ideal but it does > appear from a brief glance to be what the kernel is doing internally so > if it's good enough for the kernel I'd say it's good enough for zeroconf > too :) . That was pretty much what I had concluded as well. Thanks for the info. Cheers, Anand -- `When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how holy the motives' -- Robert A Heinlein, "If this goes on --"
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
