At Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:23:47 +0100 (CET), sth...@nethelp.no wrote: > > Routing and forwarding decisions are completely independent of what > > addresses are configured on the interface. Contrary to IPv4 behavior, > > the configuration of an address using P::/64 prefix does not > > automatically add a route to the P::/64 prefix. What prefixes are > > on-link is determined by > > > > a) on a router - by configuration > > b) on a host - by information contained in the RAs > > It may be sacrilege to mention it in this group - but b) here is > certainly not the only view of how things work (or for that matter > how they *should* work). For instance - FreeBSD 7.x needs explicit > configuration to turn on IPv6. If IPv6 is turned on, you can configure > a static IPv6 address (for instance a /64 prefix) for an interface - > and this will indeed add a route to this /64 network. Or you can use > various types of autoconfiguration.
As you seem to indicate, this should rather be considered an implementation details, but this FreeBSD's behavior should be viewed as a shortcut of configuring both an address and an on-link prefix by a single operation, rather than an instance that "configuring an address automatically adds a route to the /64 prefix" (I know that, because I designed and implemented it:-). In fact, the FreeBSD kernel internally maintains addresses and prefixes separately, and in that sense it rather diligently follows the model that Suresh explained. It adopts the "shortcut" behavior as a compromise for existing operators who are very familiar with IPv4 operations and would expect the same side effect. --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
