On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 01:08:15PM +0200, Alexander Zubkov via Bird-users wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently one can use only a predefined set of advertised options in radv
> protocol, that are supported by bird's configuration. It would be
> convenient to be able to specify other possible options at least manually
> as a blob so one should not wait until it is supported in the code,
> released, etc.
Hi
Merged:
https://gitlab.nic.cz/labs/bird/-/commit/9c81250c04798fd274ae9d77380e93b941ac2d7f
Hopefully there is no requirement for RA options to be sorted by type, at
least i did not find it in RFC 4861.
The only objection from me is that 'other type' option name is kind of
non-descriptive, does not indicate it is related to RA options (nor it is
implicated by context). I do not really have a good idea for alternative,
perhaps just 'custom option'? What do you think?
Yes, I was thinking about "custom" too. But it introduces a new keyword. So I tried too choose something suitable from available keywords. But if it is not a problem, I would prefer "custom" too as more descriptive.
Could you prepare a patch for documentation?
Sure, just will wait for the final decision about the syntax ("other" vs "custom").
BTW, why not to use WALK_LIST() in radv_prepare_custom()?
(just noticed in now)
That is a good question. Actually I just used the structure of the similar function for the predefined option and didn't thought much about it. Now that you pointed that out, I remember that macro from the other parts of the code. And it seems reasonable to use it here, and probably in the "source" function too. I can prepare a patch for that.
--
Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo
Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santiago@crfreenet.org)
OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net)
"To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."