Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6

[Brian Haberman <[e-mail]>]

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*?

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