Re: RFC3484 destination address selection rule 2 is buggy

On Mar 18, 2008, at 5:10 AM, Gabi Nakibly wrote:

> Determining whether the destination address is in the zone of a  
> source address can be tricky. However, it is fairly easy in the  
> common case where the source address is link-local and the  
> destination address is global. If the latter is not on-link, than  
> it is not in the zone of the link-local source address and this  
> source address should not be included in the candidate set. If the  
> above rule will be applied in the scenario of http://tools.ietf.org/ 
> html/draft-ietf-v6ops-v6onbydefault-03, the candidate set of the v6  
> address will be empty and therefore it will be avoided by  
> destination address selection rule 1.

Speaking for myself, there is a simpler rule in that special case  
that imght be instructive in the ULA case.

There is no sense in using a link-local address as a source address  
unless one is sending to someone on the same LAN. Hence, there is no  
sense in suing a link-local address as the source if one cannot also  
use one in the destination.

Similarly, there is no sense using a ULA source address unless the  
destination is in the same ULA. If the destination is a global  
address it might or might not be able to reply, but the sender can't  
tell.

Hence, in sender address choice:
   - use a link-local source address if and only if the destination  
is a link-local address
   - use a ULA source address if and only if the destination is a ULA  
in the same prefix
   - otherwise, use a global address

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------