Hi Cenk, and all, I'm running my tests with latest master and 2016.04-branch, same behavior. Minus the fact, that the router entry in RIOT is created or missing in a somewhat 'non-deterministic' fashion.
Best, Sebastian > Am 22.04.2016 um 12:33 schrieb Cenk Gündogan <cenk.guendo...@fu-berlin.de>: > > Hey, > > That sounds like the problem described in this issue [1]. > The current master / release candidate version > should include a "workaround" fix for that. > > Cheers, > Cenk > > [1] https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/issues/5122 > > On 04/22/2016 12:19 PM, smlng wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> I'm testing COAP between RIOT on Phytec pba-d-01-kw2x and Linux on >> RasPi+Openlabs using ULA IP addresses. >> >> On the Pi I run a 'radvd' to advertise a ULA prefix to RIOT, which works: >> - RIOT sends RS after boot >> - the Pi answers with RA containing ULA prefix >> - RIOT configures ULA IP on 6lo iface >> >> COAP (or communication in general) via ULA IP works, as long as RIOT has the >> Pi in its routers cache. However, sometimes RIOT _forgets_ or does not set a >> routers entry for the Pi at all. In that case communication is not possible >> via ULAs, using link-local IPs works all the time. The issue seems be with >> the RS+RA processing. I found that sometimes RIOT does not create a routers >> entry on reception of a RA - though it does configure the ULA prefix >> correctly. >> >> I just had the case that RIOT configures the ULA _and_ sets a routers entry, >> hence communication was working. At least for about 15min, but then RIOT >> send another RS, Pi answers with RA, RIOT still has ULA IP configured -- BUT >> the routers entry for the Pi is gone and communication fails. Again: using >> link-local IPs still works. >> >> Btw. even when communication via ULAs is working, RIOT never creates a >> ncache entry for ULA IP of the Pi but it did create an ncache entry for >> link-local IP of the Pi. I thought the latter is not required/allowed in 6lo >> but for ULAs it should create an entry? >> >> Has somebody else observed this behavior or any hints how to resolve this? >> >> Thanks, best >> Sebastian >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> devel@riot-os.org >> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@riot-os.org > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
