Re: Changing the default subnet route.

[David Young <dyoung%pobox.com@localhost>]

On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 11:33:33AM +0000, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-12-24 at 12:58 -0600, David Young wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 09:37:07AM +0000, Roy Marples wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2008-12-22 at 18:40 -0600, David Young wrote:
> > > > How does this behavior of IPv4 ifaddrs compare with IPv6?
> > > 
> > > A quick test shows that IPv6 behaves correctly here.
> > > 
> > > ifconfig bge0 inet6 fee1:: alias
> > > ifconfig iwi0 inet6 fee1:: alias
> > > route change -net -inet6 fee1::/64 -ifp iwi0
> > > ifconfig bge0 inet6 fee1:: -alias
> > > ifconfig bge0 inet6 fee1:: alias
> > 
> > Did IPv6 work correctly prior to your change to rtsock.c?
> 
> From memory, yes it did as the inet6 does does not appear to use
> IFA_ROUTE. But I don't have a non-patched kernel handy to test with just
> yet.

I see IFA_ROUTE all over netinet6/in6.c. :-)

> > > However the 
> > > fee1:: MACADDR UHL
> > > route is not changed which could be a bug.
> > 
> > Does the corresponding IPv4 route change?
> 
> Why should it? All the above commands referenced -inet6 and should not
> affect IPv4 in any way or form.

What I meant was, when you run the corresponding IPv4 script, does
a IPv4 route corresponding to that IPv6 route change, or not?

IPv4 and IPv6 should work quite a lot alike in order to avoid
surprises.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung%ojctech.com@localhost      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933