A=1 L=0 PIO

Enno Rey erey at ernw.de
Tue Aug 16 13:17:06 CEST 2016


On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:49:33AM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, Sander Steffann wrote:
> > Hi Mikael,
> >
> >> I'm trying to figure out what a "normal" currently deployed in the field IPv6 host would do if it receives an RA with PIO /64 where L=0 and A=1.
> >
> > On an implementation level what I have seen on Linux is that the L flag determines whether the route 2001:db8::/64 -> eth0 is installed or not.
> Ok, thanks everybody. So it'll still do A=1 style addressing (EUI64, 
> privacy extension addressing etc)? Will it perform DAD?

from my memory: yes to all of those, for common desktop OS (Win, Linux, Max OS-X). When we did the lab testing for this one (https://www.ernw.de/download/ERNW_Whitepaper_IPv6_RAs_RDNSS_DHCPv6_Conflicting_Parameters.pdf) we played a bit with the L-flag as well, so the L=0 + A=1 scenario occurred. I don't remember any case where the things you mention did not happen.
We still have that lab infrastructure so we can repeat (some of) the tests with L=1 (and without DHCPv6). Let me know if you (or the group) is interested; we can assign a student to the task. (I'm on family holiday myself until end of Aug).



> -- 
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se

Enno Rey

ERNW GmbH - Carl-Bosch-Str. 4 - 69115 Heidelberg - www.ernw.de
Tel. +49 6221 480390 - Fax 6221 419008 - Cell +49 173 6745902 

Handelsregister Mannheim: HRB 337135
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Enno Rey

Blog: www.insinuator.net || Conference: www.troopers.de
Twitter: @Enno_Insinuator

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list