On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 11:22:31AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 05:06:15PM +0800, Andrey Savochkin wrote:
> > So, I think that we have to be sure that we use the "best" address for this
> > destination.
> > What about an unconditional use of inet_select_addr() or fib_select_addr()
> > based on prefsrc with inet_select_addr() fallback?
>
> It looks fine in theory, but I'm sure it'll break with some anal ARP filters.
> (so at least for 2.2 we probably would need to sysctl it, or teach lots
> of users about prefsrc)
When it comes to "hidden" interfaces, I don't expect problems because this
change makes them even more "hidden".
> I guess Alexey would hate your implementation because it adds a
> unnecessary fib_lookup() in a reasonable fast path, it would probably be
> better to cache it in the dst entry and pass it in.
That's a good argument against.
Let's wait for the actual Alexey's complaint :-)
I would place the cached source into neighbor structure, if it matters.
However, I'm not sure if arp requests are so frequent events.
Once in 20 seconds per neighbor...
Andrey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:17 EST