Mikhail Sokolovskiy

There are also several places where such initializer is used: - stb_ds.h in line [764](https://github.com/nothings/stb/blob/af1a5bc352164740c1cc1354942b1c6b72eacb8a/stb_ds.h#L764) (also, I don't know for what purpose this variable is used here). - stb_image.h in...

In older versions of gcc, using `{0}` initializer produces warning for the C code as well. Here is example for gcc 4.6: https://godbolt.org/z/83Wv4oYx8.

We have encountered the same problem. After investigation, I've found that RA can be enabled by other daemons, namely in the following cases: 1. Extended nexthop BGP capability is activated...

I've started a discussion #16317 about this problem. There is my minimal FRR config to reproduce the problem. The BGP daemon is enabled. There is no need for the BGP...

I apologize. I work with an older version of FRR, so I have messed up a bit with syncing changes between it and this PR. Fixed it now.

> Maybe shouldn't allow sending RAs or at least giving a warning (zlog_warn) to the operator that for example BGP unnumbered won't work if because you have RAs disabled? Hello....

As far as I understood, before this PR there were 2 states: RA explicitly enabled (`no suppress-ra`) and default state (`suppress-ra`) overridable by other daemons. So I've added the explicitly...

I've added a new option to bgpd. Used the `preserve-fw-state` option as a template for VTY command and flag handling.

I keep getting random topotests failed in modules I haven't touched in the PR (now it's MSDP, before it was OSPF, PIM). Is it the infrastructure problem, or am I...