Thank you. Do I have to post a v5 with the fixup ? -Arun -Arun On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 11:42 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 4/14/22 09:56, Arun Ajith S wrote: > > Add a new neighbour cache entry in STALE state for routers on receiving > > an unsolicited (gratuitous) neighbour advertisement with > > target link-layer-address option specified. > > This is similar to the arp_accept configuration for IPv4. > > A new sysctl endpoint is created to turn on this behaviour: > > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/interface/accept_unsolicited_na. > > > > Hi, > > Building the documentation (htmldocs) with this patch, I got: > > /home/bagas/repo/linux-stable/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst:2475: > WARNING: Unexpected indentation. > /home/bagas/repo/linux-stable/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst:2477: > WARNING: Unexpected indentation. > /home/bagas/repo/linux-stable/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst:2481: > WARNING: Unexpected indentation. > /home/bagas/repo/linux-stable/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst:2482: > WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent. > > I have applied following fixup. > > ---- 8> ---- > From 304846b43a9f962f53f3841afabfd597b3b80951 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 12:59:46 +0700 > Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "net/ipv6: Introduce accept_unsolicited_na knob to > implement router-side changes for RFC9131" > > Fix the simple table syntax. > > Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst b/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst > index 9e17efe343a..433f2e4a5fe 100644 > --- a/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst > +++ b/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst > @@ -2472,13 +2472,17 @@ accept_unsolicited_na - BOOLEAN > unsolicited neighbour advertisement with target link-layer address option > specified. This is as per router-side behavior documented in RFC9131. > This has lower precedence than drop_unsolicited_na. > + > + ==== ====== ====== ============================================== > drop accept fwding behaviour > ---- ------ ------ ---------------------------------------------- > 1 X X Drop NA packet and don't pass up the stack > 0 0 X Pass NA packet up the stack, don't update NC > 0 1 0 Pass NA packet up the stack, don't update NC > 0 1 1 Pass NA packet up the stack, and add a STALE > - NC entry > + NC entry > + ==== ====== ====== ============================================== > + > This will optimize the return path for the initial off-link communication > that is initiated by a directly connected host, by ensuring that > the first-hop router which turns on this setting doesn't have to > > base-commit: 38e01f46e0e7f88b92ca0b3f52ac6b9909ed413b > -- > An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara > > Thanks. > > -- > An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
