Re: Route Information Options in Redirect Messages (updated)

[神明達哉 <[e-mail]>]

At Tue, 7 Feb 2017 18:43:12 +0000,
"Templin, Fred L" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > BTW, if this proposal keeps the concept of "unsolicited redirect" and
> > also allows the destination address of '::' to bypass the host's
> > validity check of whether it's really the first hop router for the
> > destination,
>
> No, that is not what we want to have happen. The document doesn't
> say this currently, but we want to retain a revised version of the validity
> check. The revised version of the check would say:
>
> OLD:
>       - The IP source address of the Redirect is the same as the current
>         first-hop router for the specified ICMP Destination Address.
>
> NEW:
>       - The IP source address of the Redirect is the same as the current
>         first-hop router for the specified ICMP Destination Address, or
>         (when the ICMP Destination Address is '::') the same as the current
>         first-hop router for the specified RIOs
>
> Would welcome better wording than this, but we definitely do want
> to retain the validity check. Comments?

Okay, I now understand the intent.  In that case I think the
validation logic (currently described in Section 3.1) will have to be
more detailed.  It will also have to cover some corner cases such as
where some of RIOs contain pass the above validation but some others
don't.  Similarly, I guess it should specify which RIOs can be
accepted by the receiving host in general (e.g., when the destination
address is 2001:db8:a::1, should the host accept an RIO for
2001:db8:b::/48?).

--
JINMEI, Tatuya