On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 12:31 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Dan Williams <dcbw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Note that there isn't yet a disable_ipv4 knob though, I was > > perhaps-too-subtly trying to get you to send a patch for it, since I can > > use it too :) > > Sure, can you describe a little better the use case, as I could use > that for the commit log. My only current use case was the xen-netback > case but Zoltan has noted a few cases where an IPv4 or IPv6 address > *could* be used on the backend interfaces (which I'll still poke as > its unclear to me why they have 'em). My use-case would simply be to have an analogue for the disable_ipv6 case. In the future I expect more people will want to disable IPv4 as they move to IPv6. If you don't have something like disable_ipv4, then there's no way to ensure that some random program or something doesn't set up IPv4 stuff that you don't want. Same thing for IPv6; some people really don't want IPv6 enabled on an interface no matter what; they don't want an IPv6LL address assigned, they don't want kernel SLAAC, they want to ensure that *nothing* IPv6-related gets done for that interface. The same can be true for IPv4, but we don't have a way of doing that right now. Dan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
