On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 01:14:14AM +0200, Linus Lüssing wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 09:24:26AM +0200, Sven Eckelmann wrote:
On Monday, 10 June 2019 02:45:34 CEST Linus Lüssing wrote:
@@ -107,12 +107,20 @@ enum batadv_icmp_packettype {
- @BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_UNSNOOPABLES: we want all packets destined for
- 224.0.0.0/24 or ff02::1
- @BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_IPV4: we want all IPv4 multicast packets
- (both link-local and routeable ones)
- @BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_IPV6: we want all IPv6 multicast packets
- (both link-local and routable ones)
- @BATADV_MCAST_WANT_NO_RTR4: we have no IPv4 multicast router and therefore
- only need routeable IPv4 multicast packets we signed up for explicitly
- @BATADV_MCAST_WANT_NO_RTR6: we have no IPv6 multicast router and therefore
*/
- only need routeable IPv6 multicast packets we signed up for explicitly
enum batadv_mcast_flags { BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_UNSNOOPABLES = 1UL << 0, BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_IPV4 = 1UL << 1, BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_IPV6 = 1UL << 2,
BATADV_MCAST_WANT_NO_RTR4 = 1UL << 3,BATADV_MCAST_WANT_NO_RTR6 = 1UL << 4,};
I wonder what a good interpretation of 0x1f would be (all bits set). The code doesn't seem to be able to handle this but an interpretation would be:
- get all unsnoopable
- get all link-local but not rtr
Hrm, in hindsight I would have prefered a much cleaner, more clear and more flexible flag set like:
enum batadv_mcast_flags { BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_LL4 = 1UL << 0, BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_LL6 = 1UL << 1, BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_RTR4 = 1UL << 2, BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_RTR6 = 1UL << 3, }
The IPv4 unsnoopable case would have been equivalent to BATADV_MCAST_WANT_ALL_LL4. And for the IPv6 unsnoopable case, which is just the ff02::1 address which does not get any MLD reports, we could have injected a TT entry for 33:33:00:00:00:01 instead (or just always flooding ff02::1).
Well, I guess that's too late now.