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/