Re: [v6ops] Windows 10 doesn't honour 'M' flag in RA

Naveen Kottapalli <naveen.sarma@gmail.com> Wed, 13 December 2017 12:11 UTC

Return-Path: <naveen.sarma@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BBF6124F57; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 04:11:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 WLeqOzwZVCkO; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 04:11:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1059124BFA; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 04:11:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id f18so2355285lfg.8; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 04:11:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=wbK9+yFa4I1xuuINEBSWhuEeG9Oi/oMr0g8Ndpvp8IM=; b=vMLmK9VVBLgSts0gxTpd3kqw1L2bKluYqsYbsmKwzbbQNewzdzxM/SY1Nn2p8pLrwi Yh3MbfENLAhP+PsqbBNZsHnW6ry6NPz7QlmNgrxl8DclglVDfI7Xz0zdGbnIxVaxboZa LpaSvaK8xza0hjtjAiuRS1l7WgWPS5JHaFcD0GiGrnJSWdTIdpCWuapHqPgwWORoQ0B6 X0wKSv4l4ZVl/v9rOvs7EghtcD5ZeqpvC+Dh+fB46OMKtimF/+fwKUhz9s0NisAiUpqr bZh0ZO4UW/1BlGWAtoaGzGgP8Wl3JlvLsGk6i9fRKJFlbINifUFsUiFQoQ+0eF+97ztu Wvrw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wbK9+yFa4I1xuuINEBSWhuEeG9Oi/oMr0g8Ndpvp8IM=; b=il/4OlyRKonw24fqAkyER1qacpoRPD/C861KjUueysc+5b5FRlfkrehI1uAEF7RXi1 Me7DrMD25O1Hc6aIrgeLvBcoyWOgKe1540PlkgIWCt98XPltuHpt7aqKYrCi6SHCIK6+ 7NIYnWsn4KwIZkAhlEf/f6gwSJ26aL0DSUXMNFmfupiF+ENgN65d/XA+2TkX5Is7bRDF rWMIL51/MReziyc5eCzlk1wJyIYyt/OMZdfMzOEKEu7HmUr2Pu6IaTOh3+i5nXePvuxy ZMJ5MxanMEo/9WGR1kpHJj853MgJMf0crwTA00VBhDLd3zNkbafLswgRP0yULA+AVILa D+OA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mKBCbI07tyxXnH41dKWWmzEg4qmxhdalkYPg3/nEAgfQpsf7JvM zPNhcwNGbQzJKD+aJNlxYqbM6NdR8udCkWSNZfewIQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosAjgC+kzsZN0tHWimrafIzJegZexLj1d+v4FSlCqE+GSWGHyp0EURV6W7/KC3vYD3gGZ2GtG0NPuaiMydSUqA=
X-Received: by 10.25.167.143 with SMTP id q137mr1284770lfe.124.1513167103729; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 04:11:43 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.2.212 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 04:11:23 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712131225280.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <CANFmOtnJiKtBH9WuOjfAAaOxmrQ8SanU1ATiEY_zSA9DbAuUAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxptEK5nZTVHwuzG0aK119Ns61cdfNT3JWPafTGcAxMeeg@mail.gmail.com> <CANFmOtm2SU13o3Wey1XqhQf0WuuTzm80XXPp7Q9UGiV6Kvh5DA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712120844540.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se> <b90e4615-eee9-839a-c65b-805824122c29@gmail.com> <7c3d5bb6f4cf4df98ce53c705816242c@XCH15-06-02.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CANFmOtmdORBxjT4zHf65uKNR6-YrEYHoMCBrcCogHBWP7+ifcw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712131225280.8884@uplift.swm.pp.se>
From: Naveen Kottapalli <naveen.sarma@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:41:23 +0530
Message-ID: <CANFmOtkKcq8fkms5op1WftLmGok003UcMt4Y+0+3BLcE_myO0Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11410af6b4277a056037abcf"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/eLgEF73b42FXgakrkYvY5HU9fTw>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Windows 10 doesn't honour 'M' flag in RA
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:11:47 -0000

I got that.  But am not sure on what is the use when devices don't bother
the value of that bit in RA.

Yours,
Naveen.

On 13 December 2017 at 16:56, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Dec 2017, Naveen Kottapalli wrote:
>
> Yes, it would have been the better way.  If clients aren't even referring
>> the 'M' bit, what is the use of carrying in RA?
>>
>
> Some operating systems do, some don't. It's a hint. It's up to the
> implementor to decide what to do if the flag is set or not.
>
>
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
>