Hello!
I'm a member of the MIPL Mobile IPv6 development team. As part of our
implementation we modified linux/in6.h to support MIPv6 destination
options as described in "Mobility Support in IPv6" draft. Also we are
going to add two new ndisc options to net/ndisc.h (also defined in
MIPv6). Could these changes be integrated to the main kernel? What is
the preferred naming for these?
==
diff -urN v2.4.0-test1/include/linux/in6.h linux/include/linux/in6.h
--- v2.4.0-test1/include/linux/in6.h Thu May 25 05:52:42 2000
+++ linux/include/linux/in6.h Thu Jun 8 16:30:59 2000
@@ -142,6 +142,14 @@
#define IPV6_TLV_JUMBO 194
/*
+ * Mobile IPv6 TLV options.
+ */
+#define MIPV6_TLV_BINDACK 7
+#define MIPV6_TLV_BINDRQ 8
+#define MIPV6_TLV_BINDUPDATE 198
+#define MIPV6_TLV_HOMEADDR 201
+
+/*
* IPV6 socket options
*/
diff -urN v2.4.0-test1/include/net/ndisc.h linux/include/net/ndisc.h
--- v2.4.0-test1/include/net/ndisc.h Sun May 28 16:07:33 2000
+++ linux/include/net/ndisc.h Tue Jun 13 16:57:18 2000
@@ -21,6 +21,10 @@
#define ND_OPT_REDIRECT_HDR 4
#define ND_OPT_MTU 5
+/* Mobile IPv6 specific ndisc options */
+#define ND_OPT_RTR_ADV_INTERVAL 7
+#define ND_OPT_HOME_AGENT_INFO 8
+
#define MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_DELAY HZ
#define ND_REACHABLE_TIME (30*HZ)
==
Also I was wandering why is IPV6_TLV_ROUTERALERT defined as 20
contradicting the RFC 2711 where it's defined as 5. Is there some
logic behind this which just eludes me or is it just plain wrong?
In in6.h:
141:#define IPV6_TLV_ROUTERALERT 20
In RFC 2711 IPv6 Router Alert Option, 2.1 Syntax:
The first three bits of the first byte are zero and the value 5 in
the remaining five bits is the Hop-by-Hop Option Type number.
And one other thing, are the fixes submitted by Sami Kivisaari going
to be in the kernel anytime soon?
Antti
--
Antti J. Tuominen, JMT 3A 131, 02150 Espoo, Finland.
Research assistant, TSE Institute at Helsinki University of Technology
work: ajtuomin@xxxxxxxxxx; home: tuominen@xxxxxx
|