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

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Wed, 13 December 2017 11:26 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 CB13B127A90; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 03:26:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 ifMD_67PFNwY; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 03:26:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB889127005; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 03:26:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 39694B4; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:26:50 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1513164410; bh=qbiiJ2KPdpc+Zmg8C+D3Rvxou9DbGKFANqvJDuNV7cs=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=guh5NBitOQoD1JhwosmeQdONkr6PI7tfa8cOcDhxsN7/AHN8bE3AS0PJbV/jYyJLg NiKn2fKdtmcEw8y2lcDyZXadjrYMVSMoVGPuiUVKfAg7Y04n9rsBSCi4iMIHxU/jCm xofwtOu1fsg5dpEk8Gve7nyt/RybvkMIt95pEmg8=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371AEB1; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:26:50 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 12:26:50 +0100
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Naveen Kottapalli <naveen.sarma@gmail.com>
cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CANFmOtmdORBxjT4zHf65uKNR6-YrEYHoMCBrcCogHBWP7+ifcw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <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>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/uFkh-u1eNrxApzoY319iwdg1SGE>
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 11:26:55 -0000

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