[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: IPv6 socket behaviour different to IPv4?
On 04/06/2014 21:02, 神明達哉 wrote:
Ah, okay. So, as I understand it, this is not an issue of DAD but an
issue of DNA, and, more specifically, a matter of how precisely we
It's not really DNA either. I just used that RFC as an example of why
the behavior as I see it is required.
If you don't perform DAD on link change then why bother with DAD at all?
Disabling DAD on that interface certainly looks too
much if the purpose is to allow node-local communication using a
"detached" address. One possibility would be to introduce a tweakable
switch that disables the DNA operation at the risk of allowing the
small window on link up. Another, probably more substantial but
probably cleaner change would be to allow using a detached address for
(node) local communication (e.g., allow bind() but filter out packets
using a detached address if they are sent to the wire rather than
I've not tested this, but wouldn't a host route to the interface address
via the loopback address work?
Main Index |
Thread Index |