Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 16:03:16 -0700 From: prabhakar lakhera <prabhakar.lakhera@gmail.com> To: satish amara <satishkamara@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: LLA (Link local address) in FreeBSD route command Message-ID: <CALg%2BrhUu_CXbvCk3P5o_7NvcHmFn8iNd0uEgJH1aB0nRajNy8Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGSLe_EcbgX0DoYt4U8sQuHQrqQg15rQ6tVKkJzxS8p4Bn6m9w@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAGSLe_HQufqmNMmFx3LOPqAVWOktsKE5CE7Br6P%2Bi3bu2cpDCw@mail.gmail.com> <20120425042052.GA29615@DataIX.net> <CAGSLe_EcbgX0DoYt4U8sQuHQrqQg15rQ6tVKkJzxS8p4Bn6m9w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
comment inline: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 6:33 AM, satish amara <satishkamara@gmail.com>wrote: > I gave reference to old man page because it talks about scope which is > related to link local address of IPV6. > I don't see the latest man page talks about link-local address of IPV6. So > I am looking for how routes for link-local address are handled in latest > BSD Stack. > I see some configurations where people are giving link-local address > as gateway. > So I am trying to see whether these configuration are valid and if > not there could be bug. > >>>>> I meantioned this in a previous mail and in a different context but RFC 4861 seems to be mandating indirect routes with LLA gateway in order to process redirects. There's no reason why user should not be allowed to add static routes with LLA gateways (actually there's a case to not allow non LLA gateways for RFC compliance): In RFC 4861 Section: 8.1. Validation of Redirect Messages<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4861#page-74>; we have the following bullets: A host *MUST *silently discard any received Redirect message that does not satisfy all of the following validity checks: - IP Source Address is a link-local address. Routers *MUST *use their link-local address as the source for Router Advertisement and Redirect messages so that hosts can uniquely identify routers. ... ... - The IP source address of the Redirect is the same as the current first-hop router for the specified ICMP Destination Address. > > If BSD allows to configure routes for link local address of IPV6 then > Ithink it could be bug as they are local to subnet and typically there > routes are automatic. I am not sure allowing link-local address as gateway > address is valid or not for IPV6. > > Thanks, > Satish K Amara > > > > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Jason Hellenthal > <jhellenthal@dataix.net>wrote: > > > > > First off lets start by referencing something that is correct and > > staying within-band instead of OOB. > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=route > > > > Review that page and if you still have any questions then please ask > > again. > > > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 05:07:54PM -0400, satish amara wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am trying to see what is valid and is supported in latest > > > FreeBSD > > > > > > Does BSD let user add routes to LLA destinations? > > > > > > Does BSD let user specify LLA gateway without specifying the scope? > > > > > > > > > I see following man page which talks about scope but looks like it not > > > supported in the latest. > > > > > > http://www.manpagez.com/man/8/route/ > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Satish K Amara > > > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > -- > > > > - (2^(N-1)) > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALg%2BrhUu_CXbvCk3P5o_7NvcHmFn8iNd0uEgJH1aB0nRajNy8Q>