Emmanuel Thierry wrote: > The RFC is consistent with this behaviour. It states that a node may send > Router Advertisements while having its forwarding capabilities disabled, as > soon as it sets the Router Lifetime field (AdvDefaultLifetime) to zero. > RFC 4861 section 6.2.5: >> Note that system management may disable a router's IP forwarding >> capability (i.e., changing the system from being a router to being a >> host), a step that does not necessarily imply that the router's >> interfaces stop being advertising interfaces. In such cases, >> subsequent Router Advertisements MUST set the Router Lifetime field >> to zero. > > > As a conclusion, i kindly ask you to consider relaxing the constraint of > having net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding enabled. It breaks some use cases were > disabling forwarding is intended and legal.
Maybe 6.2.3: A router might want to send Router Advertisements without advertising itself as a default router. For instance, a router might advertise prefixes for stateless address autoconfiguration while not wishing to forward packets. Such a router sets the Router Lifetime field in outgoing advertisements to zero. I think it is better to send feedback to radvd upstream. --yoshfuji -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
