On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / [iso-2022-jp] $B5HF#1QL@(B wrote:

In article [ref] (at Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:22:47 +0300 (EEST)), Pekka Savola [off-list ref] says:

quoted

So, my thought (comments welcome) is:

 1) when accept_ra changes from 0 -> 1, initiate the route 
    solicitation process, likewise as one would when the interface is 
    brought up.

    Makes sense?

 2) (probably not a good idea, but some food for thought..) when accept_ra 
    changes from 1 -> 0, delete any autoconfigured routes or
    prefixes.  (could be ugly / dangerous..)

Well, we'd propose to have another config "send_rs" or something like that
because accept_ra is also effective against unsolicited RAs.
It, "send_rs," tells kernel to start sending RS 
when the variable is changed 0 to 1 and/or 
when interface is going up.

I don't have any major objections to this model, I'm just worried that it
might make the configuration more complex (we already have accept_ra and
"autoconf" toggles which are confusing enough without documentation :-)
with little gain.

That is, is there any case when you'd want to accept an RA but *not* send 
RS?  I fail to see clear applicability for this, hence my proposal to 
overload accept_ra :-)

Assume the node has eth0 and eth1.
Operation will be something like the following.

If you want to listen RA and to send RS on some interfaces,
 sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.default.accept_ra=0
 sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.default.send_rs=0
 ifup -a
 sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.eth0.accept_ra=1
 sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.eth0.send_rs=1

If you want to listen RA on all interfaces, but do not want to send RS on 
some of them, 
 sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.default.accept_ra=1
 sysctl -w net.ipv6.conf.default.send_rs=0
 ifup -a
 sysctl -w net.ipv6.cont.eth0.send_rs=1

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings