Linux and ULA support and default route

[Brian E Carpenter]

On 13/10/2016 21:14, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> Of note is the fact that the ULA prefix being announced is the ubiquitous
> fd00::/64.

0 is a perfectly random number, just like the ubiquitous PIN code 1234.

But yes, this a sloppy job by the FritzBox. Hopefully they've fixed this in
more recent models.

> Great idea, ULAs.

In the right circumstances, yes, actually. And actually my circumstances
yesterday were right for a ULA prefix: the ISP failed to give my CE a prefix.
Today, they gave me a prefix, and so Linux gives me a default route.

   Brian

> 
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> This creates a tricky problem for homenet, I think, but I agree that my CE
>> is doing what that requirement says. This also creates a truly annoying
>> coding problem for me, which I won't go into here (except to gripe that
>> Linux
>> makes it very annoying indeed to discover your own global unicast address).
>>
>> Thanks
>>    Brian
>>
>> On 13/10/2016 16:55, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
>>> The linux host is correctly not adding a default route because the RA
>>> specifies a router lifetime of 0, likely due to RFC 7084 requirement G-4.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
>>> brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'll send you the RA packet off-list.
>>>>
>>>>     Brian
>>>>
>>>> On 13/10/2016 14:10, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>>> On 13/10/2016 13:47, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
>>>>>> brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But what it says (before I install the correct default route) is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fd00::/64 via fe80::be05:43ff:fe8e:ce39 dev wlp2s0  proto ra  metric
>>>> 600
>>>>>>> pref medium
>>>>>>> fe80::/64 dev wlp2s0  proto kernel  metric 256  pref medium
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No default, as you can see.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have a tcpdump of the RA?
>>>>>
>>>>> No. Any suggestions how I can catch one? Would a Wireshark capture be
>>>> useful?
>>>>>
>>>>>     Brian
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>