Re: IPv6: the same address can be added multiple times

[kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)]

davem@redhat.com (David S. Miller)  wrote on 13.05.01 in <15103.18224.265350.877968@pizda.ninka.net>:

> Pekka Savola writes:
>  > But it still looks dirty.  Also, it's easier to add it many times by
>  > mistake; IPv4 addresses do not allow this.  And as you have to remove
>  > them N times too, this may create even more confusion.
>
> There is this growing (think growing as in "fungus") set of thinking
> that just because something can be misused, this is an argument
> against it even existing.

But that does not seem to be the argument here. Rather, it is "I can  
certainly see where this can cause harm, but I cannot see where it is  
useful for anything at all, so why do we have it?".

> I think this is wrong.  I'm seeing it a lot, especially on this list,
> and it's becomming a real concern at least to me.
>
> Most of the time the argument goes like:
>
> 1: "Well, we allow this because you can do usefull things X Y and
>     Z as a result."

What is X, Y and Z in this particular case? Nobody seems to have said  
that.

Incidentally, this thread is *very* similar to the "mount the exact same  
FS several times on the exact same mountpoint" thing. I'd expect to get a  
similar resolution (i.e., *don't* allow that).

MfG Kai