From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 14 02:25:43 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4AF41065672; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:25:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B36A1520CC; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:25:43 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4EE80927.1060502@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 18:25:43 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111110 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hiroki Sato References: <58FFF22D-6578-447D-AAC0-9673057DAD84@gsoft.com.au> <4EE7CDBE.1090605@swin.edu.au> <20111214.094151.1901872428047005963.hrs@allbsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20111214.094151.1901872428047005963.hrs@allbsd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: undefined OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: doconnor@gsoft.com.au, mrossi@swin.edu.au, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 8 as an IPv6 router X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:25:43 -0000 On 12/13/2011 16:41, Hiroki Sato wrote: > I do not think it is a good idea that the rtadvd daemon automatically > splits prefixes shorter than 64 to ones with just 64. "Which prefix > should be advertised" is one of things which a sysadmin must specify > explicitly when it receives prefixes shorter than 64 via IA-PD or > something, and it should match the actual subnet structure. A simple > way to do so is to assign an address onto eth0, in his example, with > desired /64 subnet prefix from the delegated (shorter) prefix, and > run rtadvd with no configuration file. This is the expected > scenario. A /60 address assigned on eth0 does not work as a default > router address for multiple /64 subnets anyway... +1 There are some things that can be done automatically, this isn't one of them. The "assign an address" trick being a reasonable compromise. Doug -- [^L] Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/