[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: IPv6: the same address can be added multiple times (David S. Miller)  wrote on 13.05.01 in <>:

> Pekka Savola writes:
> > But it still looks dirty. Also, it's easier to add it many times by
> > mistake; IPv4 addresses do not allow this. And as you have to remove
> > them N times too, this may create even more confusion.
> There is this growing (think growing as in "fungus") set of thinking
> that just because something can be misused, this is an argument
> against it even existing.

But that does not seem to be the argument here. Rather, it is "I can
certainly see where this can cause harm, but I cannot see where it is
useful for anything at all, so why do we have it?".

> I think this is wrong. I'm seeing it a lot, especially on this list,
> and it's becomming a real concern at least to me.
> Most of the time the argument goes like:
> 1: "Well, we allow this because you can do usefull things X Y and
> Z as a result."

What is X, Y and Z in this particular case? Nobody seems to have said

Incidentally, this thread is *very* similar to the "mount the exact same
FS several times on the exact same mountpoint" thing. I'd expect to get a
similar resolution (i.e., *don't* allow that).

MfG Kai
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:53    [W:0.127 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site