From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Dec 29 21:40:24 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@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 B400BC96975 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2016 21:40:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A34DD1C68 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2016 21:40:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id uBTLeN6u096942 for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2016 21:40:24 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 196361] Constrain IPv6 routes to each FIB (Consistent with IPv4 route behaviour) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 21:40:23 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: needs-patch, needs-qa X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: asomers@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 21:40:24 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D196361 --- Comment #12 from Alan Somers --- (In reply to jhujhiti from comment #11) Regarding same_ip_multiple_ifaces_fib0, the configuration isn't valid. But that's not the point of the test. As the comment and the PR say, the point= of the test is just to make sure you don't panic if you try to configure a sys= tem that way. For that matter, assigning the same IP to different interfaces on different fibs (as same_ip_multiple_ifaces) tests doesn't really make sense either, b= ut I added a test case for it because it worked on older versions of FreeBSD and some people were actually using that feature. But the situation is much mo= re interesting with IPv6 because of the concept of scopes. With IPv6, it makes sense to assign the same address to multiple interfaces, as long as their scopes are not overlapping. They can even use the same FIB. For example, = the same link-local address can be assigned to two different interfaces, as lon= g as they're on separate networks. Since these patches are starting to get fairly complicated, could you please create an account at https://reviews.freebsd.org/ and upload the patches th= ere? It's far easier to review patches there than on Bugzilla. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=