lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Probable bug in handling disabled network interfaces (2.2.12)
From
Date
kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru writes:
> "ifconfig xxx down" does _not_ disable the interface, it shutdowns
> driver. If "ifconfig xxx" shows something, the interface is present,

This does not follow, and the conclusion is absurd.

"Present" does not reasonably imply "intended still to send and
receive packets". The whole point of setting an interface to a "down"
condition (removing IFF_UP and IFF_RUNNING) is so that the interface,
with which the particular address is associated, ceases to function.
It's what "down" means, after all. It surely does *not* mean, "the
capabilities associated with that address _at that interface_ magically
migrate to _other_ interfaces in the system."

No, the conclusion is unwarranted. As Alan observed, "that needs
investigating." Removal of IFF_UP and IFF_RUNNING on cipcb0 should
have stopped the system from reacting to cipcb0's address entirely.
I am looking at the code, and I believe I may know from where the
problem emanates, but this is my first time ever looking closely at
Linux' networking code, so I'm not at all sure yet. I certainly have
no fix now.

--karl

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans