From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Wed Mar 1 05:30:52 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79E34CF6FCD for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 05:30:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-io0-x230.google.com (mail-io0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FEA41064 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 05:30:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-io0-x230.google.com with SMTP id f84so23127173ioj.0 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:30:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=1NS0P/iiHAQXsJX08msu/pN7GdCNlYZFm6eMJmpg6CU=; b=ay9ZH+ITedANg/NLtjO6na8Ysf360PwskJRqVaSXMkG6o+yLsfMahbOrVZtXkbQ4sL UU3vqcniyt5r4xR3hm4vqAWSv31GiqnN8/Esw9UO4hG5UE14eEpOv+h/e2oBBPBL9a9d tg1vxBTnYoE1sIaCjHwpgaMB0BX14rqWnvvLXI1LLcVNguQzcoF2+4XTZPCtLPm1boAk MFT4Znbw402Ql48MYkWZRk/Tkzp0AnBFGauPOW+fz9C7bVL2mAWNpTT/Py4iWXfuwOzf 9qS29gI0wstJcfUV8SYMiz7odehn1x0gZwDf5VRKmXLzw/QQ1B3P3HOwcEZeCwE4UMDv zaqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1NS0P/iiHAQXsJX08msu/pN7GdCNlYZFm6eMJmpg6CU=; b=UCfE7UGdOukp9DrXDruv9pxEUfHIHnXh+bL/P6h+Dih74wqtKZY91B35TO9x7lKcTx Di0MYQQJxRxo1ZF8qF+xQ9ON/kxd9PxRbtMIvLTKgJZ41aZRrVLQh0WALdfvKPHXWEW0 CAOLaVTWC2aRwzlbmwHIX1DBsaDIEOhE58I2nhxqHUE+qW4vFU9dTwbt1HK/j4fpHBPA pG2Gf4qGM/P+ib0Kx7ef0nN4ku66KRUM70OqM9Rw/uoNyDOu7sseaLTMSLPCD4xHDTaM zOV3VgUyNitQkyR7E6bpkJneVB8RWv5iHoxQvN3OJy7Myi5QW7fm8o7DqM+Dbq9NOdu4 HPSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lJLFpa2Vr/fnR9LxX24Z/8DyRS1SUi0g01GGCIGrXFdfeDoiirvonshaHnAAbmhjw/g7ZqUZNMeSfNvQ== X-Received: by 10.107.198.193 with SMTP id w184mr6760557iof.19.1488346251585; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:30:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.134.129 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:30:51 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [50.253.99.174] In-Reply-To: <20170301.141856.1441900213581775162.hrs@allbsd.org> References: <201703010447.v214lM4c026957@repo.freebsd.org> <20170301.141856.1441900213581775162.hrs@allbsd.org> From: Warner Losh Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:30:51 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: VyjEa6VUAqJNuvAfAed35Hxk-XE Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r314471 - head/sys/net To: Hiroki Sato Cc: Warner Losh , src-committers , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 05:30:52 -0000 On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote: > Warner Losh wrote > in <201703010447.v214lM4c026957@repo.freebsd.org>: > > im> Author: imp > im> Date: Wed Mar 1 04:47:22 2017 > im> New Revision: 314471 > im> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/314471 > im> > im> Log: > im> Fix VNET - DAD detected duplicate IPv6 address > im> > im> Assign a hopefully unique, locally administered etheraddr. - for > im> epairNa & epairNb > im> > im> Submitted by: Catalin > im> Pull Request: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/pull/92 > > This was discussed in D1858. epairNa and epairNb never have the same > L2 addr because eaddr[5] is unique. If the goal of this change is to > prevent a conflict of L2 addrs with epairNs created in another vnet > jail on the same system or on the same network, eaddr[5] of epairNa > (around l.839) must also be randomized at least. > > While I am still for a deterministic value because changing the L2 > addr every time when rebooting a vnet jail is annoying, but if we use > some random numbers for the vendor bits, I think eaddr[2] should be > initialized in the same way. It's clear the consensus there was 'no go' and I don't wish to override it. I didn't know about that, so I'll revert. Warner