In D55828#1277278, @glebius wrote:

In D55828#1277277, @zlei wrote:

I though that a bit, and I think no need for the assertions.

So your point is that as we see that ifioctl() already did this check the assertions are not needed, as we already know that they will never fire.

In D55828#1277278, @glebius wrote:

In D55828#1277277, @zlei wrote:

I though that a bit, and I think no need for the assertions.

So your point is that as we see that ifioctl() already did this check the assertions are not needed, as we already know that they will never fire. But that's the point of assertions - to put them so that they never fire :) Assertions also act as documentation.

I'm not insisting on assertions, just suggesting. My longer term plan is to get rid of if_vmove anyway.

The current logic of checking the src / dst vnet is a bit confusing. Refactor them a little. See D55832 .

In D55828#1277259, @glebius wrote:

I'd suggest to add assertions that VNET is not shutting down.

In D55828#1277269, @jamie wrote:

This makes sense in if_vmove_reclaim, where the vnet comes from the held prison.

I think I read the code carefully. Please do not hesitate to correct me if I missed anything important.

I'm almost certainly that leaving start_all_aps() public visible was unintended. Post to review for sure.

The git change made me crazy while I revisit this after one year -:)

In D53484#1272094, @ivy wrote:

In D53484#1270635, @bms wrote:

It's not strictly necessary, but extra karma if you do. It looks like @cy is tracking that as ports/net/freebsd-routed anyway.

well, i don't care about this code or RIP in general and i have no idea who Vernon Schryver is or what sort of diffs we might want to upstream, so i don't really want to be responsible for this. if someone else would like to take on that task, the code will still be available in our git history (and in the port, as you mentioned).

I wouldn't rule out RIP/RIPng entirely, as there may still be "sticking plaster" situations where they are required

people who still require RIP can use a modern implementation, such as in the ports net/bird3 or net/frr10. as far as i'm aware these both work well on FreeBSD and have good implementations of both RIP and RIPng.

i personally don't think anyone should be using RIP anymore, but if they want to, they can continue to do so; we just don't want to support this in src anymore.

@pouria

MFC to: stable/15

Looks good to me.

I'd rather prefer this, to ease my brain ;)

In D55560#1271351, @mjg wrote:

I did not co-autor the change, so please drop that tag.

Good idea !

In D49447#1269028, @pouria wrote:

Are you still working on this? @zlei
Could you please set the planned change state for this revision?

Looks good to me.

Looks good to me.

Looks good to me.

Ahh, I think I see what's happening. While some time ago I was trying to diagnose PR 275474, I observed UAF and got messed up in mind.

Looks good to me.

Looks good!

Solid fix !

In D55198#1262845, @markj wrote:

The init routine of a lagg(4) interface will not change during the whole lifecycle. So we can call lagg_init() directly instead of through the function pointer.

I just want to note that this logic does not generalize everywhere. e.g., netmap will sneakily override the I/O routines in an ifnet in some cases. It does not touch if_init, so this particular case is ok.

Looks good to me.

Looks good to me.

Except for the tests, do you have real usage of the netlink protocol ? The commit message does not mention it. So it is better to explain, otherwise would confuse people.

This is a behavior change. Please also add a meta Relnotes: yes to the commit message.