Link-local and ACLs

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Tue Jul 25 00:41:06 CEST 2017


On 25/07/2017 09:10, Tore Anderson wrote:
> * Brian E Carpenter
> 
>> So, I'm not aware of any realistic case where this happens, or any
>> reason for it.
> 
> As Gert already pointed out: Neighbour Discovery.

Well yes, like ARP. But that's the exception that proves the
rule - you do it when that is really what you mean *and*
the target address is within an on-link prefix.

I can do it too, even from Windows:

ping -n 100 -S fe80::c0de:dead:beef:768e%11 2001:df0:0:2006:c0de:beef:dead:be83

Those addresses are obfuscated, but you get the idea, and
I see the ICMPv6 packets with Wireshark, but get no replies.

Why would you ever do it for normal traffic? And why
would ACLs be relevant for on-link traffic?

   Brian

> 
> A few examples from an IX near me:
> 
> 23:06:11.020045  In IP6 fe80::8678:acff:fe66:80db > 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029, length 32
> 23:06:11.563763  In IP6 fe80::aa0c:dff:fe71:5768 > 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029, length 32
> 23:06:29.958824  In IP6 fe80::92e2:baff:fe3f:7665 > 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029, length 32
> 23:06:34.239488  In IP6 fe80::523d:e5ff:fe89:4ec4 > 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029, length 32
> 23:06:45.177659  In IP6 fe80::2c1:64ff:fe60:380 > 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029: ICMP6, neighbor solicitation, who has 2001:7f8:12:1::3:9029, length 32
> 
> Tore
> .
> 


More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list