netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] IPv6: (5/5) Allow IPv6 tunnels without own IPv6 address

To: "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / _$B5HF#1QL@" <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: (5/5) Allow IPv6 tunnels without own IPv6 address
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 01:52:01 -0700
Cc: vnuorval@xxxxxxxxxx, usagi-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20030901.112409.61391981.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309010249070.26242-200000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309010257390.26242-200000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030901.112409.61391981.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 11:24:09 +0900 (JST)
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / _$B5HF#1QL@ <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In article <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309010257390.26242-200000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at 
> Mon, 1 Sep 2003 03:11:58 +0300 (EEST)), Ville Nuorvala <vnuorval@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> says:
> 
> > unless (link-local) protocols like DHCPv6 or MLD are run over the virtual
> > link formed by IPv6 tunnels, the net_devices representing the tunnels
> > don't necessarily need to have an IPv6 address configured specifically to
> > them.
> 
> Wrong. All interfaces have a link-local address. (RFC2462)

Are you sure there isn't an exception in the ip6ip6 tunnel
RFC?

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