Hi Suresh,
Thanks for your reply. I have a doubt on your answer.
As per your comments, there can be two MLD report msg which will join the
node in solicited multicast group . But in the RFC 4861, they have mention
there should be a join request to all node multicast group.
.
RFC 4861 Statement:- 7.2.1.Interface Initialization
“When a multicast-capable interface becomes enabled, the node MUST join the
all-nodes multicast address on that interface, as well as the solicited-
node multicast address corresponding to each of the IP addresses assigned
to the interface.”
I have one more query regarding NA messages.
While creating ipv6 address on an interface, unsolicited NA messages will be
sent to all node multicast address to inform all other nodes in the network.
When i tried this scenario , I have seen two NA messages.
1) source as ipv6 address and destination as ipv6 all node address.
2) source as link-local address and destination as ipv6 all node address.
My question is, whenever there is a change in ipv6 address on a node, both
these 2 NA messages will propogate through the network?
or is it really required to share about the link-local address as we are not
at all changing the ipv6 link-local address.?
Thanks in advance,
Niviya
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Suresh Krishnan <
suresh.krish...@ericsson.com> wrote:
> Hi Niviya,
>
>
> On 10-04-16 04:18 AM, niviya vijayan wrote:
>
>> Hi ,
>> I have a query regarding the interface initialization process for an ipv6
>> enabled interface.
>>
>> As per the RFC4861, the node has to join
>> a. All-node multicast address{FE02::1}
>>
>> b. Solicited multicast address {FF02::1:ff00:<last 24 bits of
>> ipaddress>}
>>
>>
>> I have tried capturing packets for one of the switch while configuring an
>> ipv6 address. I could see IPv6 node (Ipv6 address) joining ‘All node
>> multicast address’ and ‘Solicited multicast address’. Apart from that I am
>> seeing an extra join request from the Link Local address to the ‘All node
>> multicast address’. Any specific reason for this? Is this a correct
>> behaviour ?or is there any requirement for joining link local address on the
>> all node multicast node while creating an ipv6 address on the interface? why
>> it is required? if it is required, then this message will repeat for each &
>> every ipv6 address created on an interface since it has only one link-local
>> address.
>>
>
> It is very strange that you see a join for the all nodes multicast address.
> Nodes don't have to send a MLD join for the link-local all-nodes multicast
> address and I have never seen an implementation that does this. What I would
> expect is 2 MLD (listener report) joins
>
> 1) MLD join for the solicited node multicast address from the unspecified
> address (to test for the uniqueness of the tentative link-local address).
> 2) MLD join for the solicited node multicast address from the link-local
> address.
>
> Cheers
> Suresh
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
