Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Probable bug in handling disabled network interfaces (2.2.12) | From | Karl Kleinpaste <> | Date | 19 Sep 1999 16:48:55 -0400 |
| |
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/
| |