(usagi-users 03687) Re: Bug in order of multiple IPv6 addresses per interface? Newest added one is preferred in difference to IPv4
Peter Bieringer <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ipv6.usagi.users,gmane.linux.network |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 schrieb: > Hello. > > In article <[email protected]> (at Mon, 21 Aug 2006 07:36:19 +0200), Peter Bieringer <[email protected]> says: > >> In IPv6, the behavior is completly different: >> >> # ip -6 addr show dev eth0 |grep -w inet6 |grep -w global >> inet6 2001:db8:0:1::11/64 scope global >> >> # ip -6 addr add 2001:db8:0:1::253/64 dev eth0 >> >> # ip -6 addr show dev eth0 |grep -w inet6 |grep -w global >> inet6 2001:db8:0:1::253/64 scope global <- #2 !!!! >> inet6 2001:db8:0:1::11/64 scope global <- #1 >> >> So the last added on is now the first in list. Also, it gets no >> "secondary" flag and "ip" doesn't even support this flag. > > IPv6 does not have secondary flag. We even reuse that for > IPv6 temporary addresses. > >> And the worse thing is that the first one in list (= last added one) is >> now used as default for outgoing connections. Can be easily tested using >> "ping6". > : >> Is this a bug (I hope so) or a (undocumented?) feature? > > An implementation decision. Thank you for this clarification. > I do not favor changing this so far. Hmm, would it be possible to implement a primary flag in the future? BTW: Does anyone know about the behavior of *BSD for this issue? Peter -- Dr. Peter Bieringer http://www.bieringer.de/pb/ GPG/PGP Key 0x958F422D mailto:[email protected] Deep Space 6 Co-Founder and Core Member http://www.deepspace6.net/ OpenBC http://www.openbc.com/hp/Peter_Bieringer/ Personal invitation to OpenBC http://www.openbc.com/go/invita/3889