Re: Source for ICMP on link-local-only interface?

Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> Wed, 09 February 2011 12:12 UTC

Return-Path: <pekkas@netcore.fi>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40EC43A69A4 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 04:12:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PcobCO+1LwYt for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 04:12:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from netcore.fi (eunet-gw.ipv6.netcore.fi [IPv6:2001:670:86:3001::1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BAC3A6984 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 04:12:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from netcore.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by netcore.fi (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p19CCZuL017547 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 14:12:35 +0200
Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id p19CCZn2017544; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 14:12:35 +0200
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 14:12:35 +0200
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: Tore Anderson <tore.anderson@redpill-linpro.com>
Subject: Re: Source for ICMP on link-local-only interface?
In-Reply-To: <4D527D26.4010500@redpill-linpro.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1102091410320.16057@netcore.fi>
References: <F5C976B3-4C9C-4736-9130-07750606C69F@muada.com> <4D527765.2080202@redpill-linpro.com> <B20C9190-C3CB-4CB7-8F14-2106E10ABE75@muada.com> <4D527D26.4010500@redpill-linpro.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.5 at otso.netcore.fi
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Cc: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>, 6man 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 12:12:35 -0000

On Wed, 9 Feb 2011, Tore Anderson wrote:
> Yes, but my point is that if you don't configure a global (at least
> non-link-local) prefix on the router interconnections, there's no global
> address that can be announced as the BGP next-hop. With no global
> address, the immediate link-local next-hop cannot be resolved in the
> IGP, and the route is discarded. Or am I missing something?

FWIW, not that it would address your issue -- but about 9 years ago 
there existed draft-kato-bgp-ipv6-link-local-00, which proposed some 
mods to BGP in Section 3.  I vaguely recall that at least Juniper 
claims to support this.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings