Subject: Re: Does IPv6 DAD actually work in the KAME stack?
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Ignatios Souvatzis <email@example.com>
Date: 07/20/2003 22:11:31
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 10:45:26PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> I haven't yet attempted to look and see why that NA was ignored, instead
> of causing DAD to "fail" (or "succeed" if you like, since it did manage
> to detect a duplicate address), which should have caused (I believe) ifco=
> to report an error (it didn't).
> Is this something that is known not to work?
Uhm... I've seen occurences of "IPv6 doesn't work" that pointed me at=20
a bug in multicast address handling on a specific hardware driver.
In my case it was something like "last multicast address configured doesn't
work" or "first multicast address configured doesn't work" - sort of a=20
off-by-one-error. Just to make sure, please check that the suspected culprit
does pong to multicast pings to ff02::1 with its normal configuration, or
after adding the dead:beef address.
(The interesting difference about multicast vs. IPv6 is, that non-broadcast
multicasts are part of the infrastructure, while in IPv4, to the end user
they're only part of experimental protocols that are somehow expected to
mysteriously fail, such formerly, driver bugs in handling of the multicast
address list sometimes weren't detected for a long time.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----