netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Derek Fawcus <dfawcus@cisco.com>
To: "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@?(B" <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, usagi@linux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: Fix Prefix Length of Link-local Addresses
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 18:11:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021009181111.A23231@edi-view1.cisco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021010.015432.63506989.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>; from yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org on Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 01:54:32AM +0900

On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 01:54:32AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@?(B wrote:
> In article <20021009170018.H29133@edinburgh.cisco.com> (at Wed, 9 Oct 2002 17:00:18 +0100), Derek Fawcus <dfawcus@cisco.com> says:
> 
> > All link local's are currently supposed to have those top bits
> > ('tween 10 and 64) zero'd,  however any address within the link local
> > prefix _is_ on link / connected and should go to the interface.
> > 
> > i.e. it's perfectly valid for me to assign a link local of fe80:1910::10
> >      to an interface and expect it to be work,  likewise for a packet
> >      destined to any link local address to trigger ND.
> 
> First of all, please don't use such addresses.

Why not,  they are perfectly legal?

> By spec, auto-configured link-local address is fe80::/64
> and connected route should be /64.

Yes auto-configured have fe80:0:0:0: in their upper 64 bits,  but that
is just for autoconfigured addessses.  That is a seperate issue to which
prefix desinates link local.

Connected routes don't have to be /64,  things work correctly even if
one picks any other value.  

> If you do really want to use such addresses (like fe80:1920::10),
> you can put another route by yourself, at your own risk.

No - what I'm saying is that all link locals should go to the link.

There is no risk inherent in using such an address or link local prefix.

If a mechanism is required such that autoconfig generates the correct
type of address,  then add it.  But that doesn't _require_ that
the connected route be /64.

I happen to use link locals like the quite often,  since it makes
testing and reading packet traces a hell of a lot easier.

> We should not configure in such way by default.
> and, we should even have to add "discard" route for them 
> by default for safe.

Why.  In what way is it not 'safe' to have any link local address
sent onto the link?  They'll either reach a destination or not,
but given that they'll never leave the link,  they can't be inherently
unsafe.

DF

  reply	other threads:[~2002-10-09 17:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-10-07 15:05 [PATCH] IPv6: Fix Prefix Length of Link-local Addresses YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-10-07 18:55 ` David S. Miller
2002-10-08  0:37   ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-10-08 19:40     ` David S. Miller
2002-10-09 16:00 ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-09 16:54   ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-10-09 17:11     ` Derek Fawcus [this message]
2002-10-09 17:16     ` Pekka Savola
2002-10-09 19:03       ` kuznet
2002-10-09 19:23         ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-10-09 20:47           ` kuznet
2002-10-09 21:46   ` Yuji Sekiya
2002-10-09 22:44     ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-09 23:14       ` David S. Miller
2002-10-09 23:29         ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-09 23:24           ` David S. Miller
2002-10-09 23:36             ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-09 23:41             ` Yuji Sekiya
2002-10-09 23:45               ` David S. Miller
2002-10-10  0:00                 ` Yuji Sekiya
2002-10-10  0:04                   ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-10  0:14                     ` Yuji Sekiya
2002-10-10  0:21                       ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-10  0:35                         ` Yuji Sekiya
2002-10-10  0:42                           ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-10  0:56                             ` Yuji Sekiya
2002-10-10  1:11                               ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-10  0:10                   ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-10  0:02                 ` Derek Fawcus
2002-10-09 23:51               ` Derek Fawcus

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20021009181111.A23231@edi-view1.cisco.com \
    --to=dfawcus@cisco.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=usagi@linux-ipv6.org \
    --cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).