On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:21:30AM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2017, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The problem with the patched code is that it tries to resolve ipv6
> > addresses that are not created/validated by the kernel.
>
> OK. Simon, p
Hello,
On Mon, 24 Apr 2017, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The problem with the patched code is that it tries to resolve ipv6
> addresses that are not created/validated by the kernel.
OK. Simon, please apply to ipvs tree.
Acked-by: Julian Anastasov
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov
Hi,
On Sat, 2017-04-22 at 14:16 +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>
> > When creating a new ipvs service, ipv6 addresses are always accepted
> > if CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6 is enabled. On dest creation the address family
> > is not explicitly checked.
> >
> > This
Hello,
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> When creating a new ipvs service, ipv6 addresses are always accepted
> if CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6 is enabled. On dest creation the address family
> is not explicitly checked.
>
> This allows the user-space to configure ipvs services even if the
When creating a new ipvs service, ipv6 addresses are always accepted
if CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6 is enabled. On dest creation the address family
is not explicitly checked.
This allows the user-space to configure ipvs services even if the
system is booted with ipv6.disable=1. On specific configuration, ip
