From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 17 19:29:52 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E56CAF0; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:29:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eric@vangyzen.net) Received: from aussmtpmrkpc120.us.dell.com (aussmtpmrkpc120.us.dell.com [143.166.82.159]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A79AB8FC16; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:29:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Loopcount0: from 64.238.244.148 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,602,1344229200"; d="scan'208";a="7329248" Message-ID: <507F072F.6080707@vangyzen.net> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 14:29:51 -0500 From: Eric van Gyzen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120822 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" Subject: Re: Tahi "Redirected On-link" Test Case References: <507DD768.7000803@vangyzen.net> In-Reply-To: <507DD768.7000803@vangyzen.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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, 17 Oct 2012 19:29:53 -0000 On 10/16/2012 16:53, Eric van Gyzen wrote: > I am currently working on a fix for kern/152791 (Tahi IPv6 Ready Logo > test case #169: Redirected On-link). I have a change to add the host > route, and it works for test case 169. However, the route never gets > removed, so all subsequent test cases fail (because they first verify > that the Node Under Test thinks the destination is off-link). > > How/When should I clean up the route? > > Each test case runs a common cleanup procedure, which sends a RA with > a Router Lifetime of zero and a Prefix Information option with a Valid > Lifetime and Preferred Lifetime of zero. This deprecates the NUT's > only global address, by which it reaches the newly-on-link > destination. However, it doesn't seem rational to use this event to > trigger a cleanup of the route. > > The only other trigger I can imagine is the transition of the > Destination Cache entry to the Stale state. That also doesn't make > complete sense. (It probably also wouldn't work, since in my testing, > test case 170 begins immediately after test case 169 ends.) > > I'm assuming a certain amount of familiarity (on your part) with these > tests. If you'd like, I can explain them in more detail. > > Thanks in advance for any advice, > > Eric Ignore me. I was working with incomplete information. The common cleanup procedure also includes packets that trigger NUD to delete the entry from the Neighbor Cache. So, the now-obvious answer to my question is to delete the route on this event. Eric