[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling b0rked

To: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling b0rked
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:50:49 +0300 (EEST)
Cc: davem@xxxxxxxxxx, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <200307170003.EAA12843@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > What happens when you do "ping6 3FFE:FFFF:A:B::1" ?
> ping did, does and will work and I do not understand what you want
> to say or ask. Do you want to know how it works?
> Well, IPv6 stack looks up the address in routing tables, finds the route,
> sees that it is on-link, sends NDISC, receiver replies, we create a frame
> and send the echo request. To continue? :-)

(Sorry, it seems I've caused a lot of confusion in some parts of this 
thread by typoeing link-local address when I used link-layer address.. 

So, assume you have 3FFE:FFFF:A:B::/64 prefix on link.  On a host on that 
link, you've manually configured the next-hop to be the router on that 
link, 3FFE:FFFF:A:B::1.

The procedure to obtain the knowledge on where to send packets whose 
next-hop is 3FFE:FFFF:A:B::1 seems quite simple, similar to ping6.

As to obtaining the link-*local* address, there are several procedures 
none of which I would recomment.  Checking the source address of a ND 
packet (e.g. in the ping6 example above), or using a protocol like ICMP 
name information queries (draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-name-lookups-10.txt).

Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>