Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6

On 10/09/2014 05:09, Brian Haberman wrote:
> 
> On 9/9/14 10:16 AM, Fernando Gont wrote:
>> On 09/09/2014 04:20 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>>> OK, but I would also like to understand why we require
>>>>> MLD messages for a Solicited-Node multicast address to
>>>>> set Router Alert.
>>>> Because in theory the multicast router needs to process the MLD message
>>>> to build its forwarding table....
>>> Why, for the Solicited-Node group, which is only meaningful on the link
>>> from which the MLD message arrives?
>> Then, let me change the question: Why do I need MLD for *this*?

I think Brian Haberman's reply shows why that is the wrong question.
You need MLD for every multicast group, including a solicited-node
group, and if you insist on MLD snooping in the bridges (let's not
obfuscate by calling them switches) then you need to snoop every
solicited-node group.

My question is orthogonal to MLD snooping: why do we require router-alert
for MLD messages referring to a solicited-node group, since it by
definition is limited to a single L2 link (even if that link is
split up by bridges)?

I tend to think this requirement is an error in the MLD spec.

    Brian C

> The MLD specs say that an MLD Report is sent for every multicast group
> joined except the All-Nodes multicast address.
> 
> The use of MLD Reports for essentially all multicast addresses was done
> to facilitate this very type of snooping functionality.  The use of
> Router Alerts in MLD messages is due to MLDv1 (and IGMPv2) using the
> group address as the IP destination rather than the All-Routers
> multicast address.
> 
>> We probably use MLD because "If you use multicast, you use MLD". Truth
>> is that, *unless your switch does MLD snooping* (and hence you *need*
>> MLD, or else your packets will not flow around), you could completely
>> kill MLD, and ND would still work just fine.
> 
> Sure, since NDP is link-local.  The drawback is what happens if your
> network is using RFC 4541 snooping that relies on seeing those MLD
> messages to build forwarding/filtering tables?
> 
>> Not to mention that there are nodes that default t running MLDv2 *for
>> this* (way overkill, IMO)
>>
> 
> Why is MLDv2 overkill?
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops