From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kyle Moffett Subject: Re: IPv6 has trouble assigning an interface Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:57:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20050311202122.GA13205@fefe.de> <20050311173308.7a076e8f.akpm@osdl.org> <20050324.205902.119922975.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> <20050425195736.GB3123@codeblau.de> <20050426061011.GA8527@codeblau.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Pekka Savola , netdev@oss.sgi.com, "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20050426061011.GA8527@codeblau.de> To: Felix von Leitner Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Apr 26, 2005, at 02:10, Felix von Leitner wrote: > OK for unicast. But multicast? I expected link-local multicast > to send on _all_ interfaces if I don't specify one. This statement makes no sense. "link-local ... on all interfaces". Isn't "link-local" supposed to mean that the address is unique and available only on that interface (ethernet segment)? It's possible to get the _same_ link-local address on multiple ethernet segments, so in that case, where would you send the packet??? When you send link-local packets, you must specify the link to which it is local. Cheers, Kyle Moffett -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCM/CS/IT/U d- s++: a18 C++++>$ UB/L/X/*++++(+)>$ P+++(++++)>$ L++++(+++) E W++(+) N+++(++) o? K? w--- O? M++ V? PS+() PE+(-) Y+ PGP+++ t+(+++) 5 X R? tv-(--) b++++(++) DI+ D+ G e->++++$ h!*()>++$ r !y?(-) ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------