IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: on-link and off-link

Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com> Mon, 12 July 2021 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 034823A1D65 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 08:19:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.004
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.004 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ScQPNQ8mPWwE for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 08:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo.hq.phicoh.net [130.37.15.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0C2D3A1CB9 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 08:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305) (Smail #158) id m1m2xiY-0000FNC; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 17:19:34 +0200
Message-Id: <m1m2xiY-0000FNC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Cc: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: on-link and off-link
From: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-7@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <162512790860.6559.14490468072475126698@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAFU7BAT0O9nsuhs5FyNjvPfRKY+EM1fLYKaMYTwaPg2QjZAEpA@mail.gmail.com> <61e14cd7-ff37-5380-e547-8a9b6d3993da@gmail.com> <CAFU7BASF-vas+PP2dVNXuqScQArC+joB-fwRGzG3UZnsqq1QJg@mail.gmail.com> <6A22DCF6-5132-44D3-AB45-E9C151376D2C@cisco.com> <6f6ab3f9-daa8-a468-1abc-f32a22497af2@gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 12 Jul 2021 16:04:58 +0200 ." <6f6ab3f9-daa8-a468-1abc-f32a22497af2@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 17:19:33 +0200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/pDTSk21X0QPzdYLb78EjKJJPRoA>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 15:19:39 -0000

> I think one question
> might be: do we agree that each IP address is assigned on an
> interface, and thus is on-link on a particular link?

This is not correct. On a NBMA link it is possible that all GUA addresses
are not on-link.

The conceptual model of on-link is that a host can use neighbor discovery
to find an onlink neighbor. If the neighbor is not on-link then traffic
has to go (at least initially) through a default router.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email