On 16/07/07 14:01, Patrick McHardy wrote: > Simon Arlott wrote: >> On 15/07/07 16:07, Patrick McHardy wrote: >>>>>Adding a route using "change": >>>>># ip -6 r change 2002::/17 dev sit0 mtu 1280 >>>>># ip -6 r show 2002::/17 >>>>>2002::/17 dev sit0 metric 1024 expires 21334368sec mtu 1280 advmss 1220 >>>>>hoplimit 4294967295 >> >> ^ This shouldn't be possible! > > > That one will probably be impossible to fix since IPv6 has never checked > for NLM_F_EXCL, doing to now might break things.
NLM_F_EXCL isn't used:
if (matches(*argv, "add") == 0)
return iproute_modify(RTM_NEWROUTE, NLM_F_CREATE|NLM_F_EXCL,
if (matches(*argv, "change") == 0 || strcmp(*argv, "chg") == 0)
return iproute_modify(RTM_NEWROUTE, NLM_F_REPLACE,
if (matches(*argv, "replace") == 0)
return iproute_modify(RTM_NEWROUTE, NLM_F_CREATE|NLM_F_REPLACE,
"test" only uses NLM_F_EXCL... I didn't even know that existed and it's
not shown in help text.
> The code looks like it would support it properly. Please add a
> few printks to inet6_rtm_newaddr to find out what goes wrong.
Ok.
>> Compare it to ipv4 where "change" never adds - "replace" is "change, or
>> add". (Also, "replace" doesn't work for v6 either).
>
>
> IPv4 doesn't check any netlink flags, so I don't think that is correct.
It looks like it works perfectly for add, change, and replace:
# ip r add 2.0.0.0/32 dev lo
# ip r change 3.0.0.0/32 dev lo
RTNETLINK answers: No such file or directory
# ip r replace 3.0.0.0/32 dev lo
# ip r change 2.0.0.0/32 dev lo mtu 100
# ip r
3.0.0.0 dev lo scope link
2.0.0.0 dev lo scope link mtu 100
--
Simon Arlott
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
