netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IPv6 has trouble assigning an interface

To: Felix von Leitner <felix-linuxkernel@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: IPv6 has trouble assigning an interface
From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:57:05 -0400
Cc: Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, "YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@" <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050426061011.GA8527@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20050311202122.GA13205@xxxxxxx> <20050311173308.7a076e8f.akpm@xxxxxxxx> <20050324.205902.119922975.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050425195736.GB3123@xxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504252359580.4921@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050426061011.GA8527@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
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------



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