From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 4 17:37:17 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B9D71065670 for ; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 17:37:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfb@mr-happy.com) Received: from vexbert.mr-paradox.net (vexbert.mr-paradox.net [IPv6:2001:470:b:28:f::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 108FF8FC15 for ; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 17:37:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from crow.mr-happy.com (crow.mr-happy.com [10.1.0.2]) by vexbert.mr-paradox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A36DD84552 for ; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 13:37:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by crow.mr-happy.com (Postfix, from userid 16139) id 528CB4501B; Fri, 4 Sep 2009 13:37:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 13:37:16 -0400 From: Jeff Blank To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20090904173716.GA2278@mr-happy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Face: #0jV*~a}VtKS-&E/!EJpH('H1Va}24dxF0oT&+.R3Gu8C; xhSC+<|+H84&YLbMvphuRT4cp3.|8EN_(2Eix/6{.Up~u`a^}0Ln&b+9Fw|BPig@-{y\pL_46d&ZwA]5%_AU?}DezfE&1!>H?3E$!Yve7.O<+..Jnb4:'6Ey_]FtFzU9=*l$1p/@gA,Ze>^5<]+r(XJ+m7`/vMDc$'wy|`e X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.94.2/9776/Fri Sep 4 07:42:19 2009 on vexbert.mr-paradox.net X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: 8.0-BETA3/IPv6: route: bad keyword: cloning X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:37:17 -0000 Hi, Upon booting an 8.0-BETA3 system with IPv6 enabled, I saw this in the console boot output: route: bad keyword: cloning usage: route [-dnqtv] command [[modifiers] args] This looks like it's from line 1062/1063 of /etc/network.subr v1.195.2.4. This system is not an IPv6 router, so do I particularly need $ipv6_default_interface set in rc.conf? Is there a situation where -cloning (still referenced in the man page) is a valid option to route (in inet6 context at least)? If no, should I file a PR? (I searched GNATS but didn't find anything matching this.) thanks, Jeff