>> 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.?
If link local ipv6 is already active, DAD needs to be performed only for changed ipv6 address (and not link local). No need to send DAD for link local once again. -- Shree From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of niviya vijayan Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 2:40 PM To: Suresh Krishnan Cc: ipv6@ietf.org Subject: Re: RFC 4861:-Link-Local address joining all-node multicast group. 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------
