Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 15:12:38 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Are there any RFCs for address selection for IPv4 Message-ID: <76798.1619449958@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <202104261456.13QEuXEa098219@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> References: <202104261456.13QEuXEa098219@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-------- Rodney W. Grimes writes: > > It is OK to have a LL as next-hop. > > > > It is not OK to send a packet with dst=LL to any next-hop. > > No, that is explicity forbidden: > RFC 3927 at 2.7 paragraph 2: > > An IPv4 packet whose source and/or destination address is in the > 169.254/16 prefix MUST NOT be sent to any router for forwarding, and > any network device receiving such a packet MUST NOT forward it, > regardless of the TTL in the IPv4 header. Right the second criteria should be: It is not OK to send a packet with src=LL or dst=LL to any next-hop. But it /is/ OK to have a next-hop router on a LL, but it is no use, unless your host has another interface with a "real" IP on it. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?76798.1619449958>