On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 01:24:40PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 10:43:45PM -0500, Amos Waterland wrote:
> > The difference between ip=off and ip=::::::off has been a cause of much
> > confusion. Document how each behaves, and do not contradict ourselves
> > by saying that "off" is the default when in fact "any" is the default
> > and is descibed as being so lower in the file.
>
> Is that really how it works? If so it sounds a bit silly to me.
> Surely it would be desirable for ip=off and ip=::::::off to
> do the same thing. Or am I missing the point?
Yes, that is how it works. Pretty confusing, so I figured I'd better
send in a patch to document it.
In the ip=::::::off case, the code in ip_auto_config() sees that
ic_enable is asserted but that ic_myaddr is NONE and proceeds to do
autoconfiguration.
I'd welcome comments from people on whether we should change how it
works instead of just document it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
