Right, Brian. Folks should stop confusing between ND off-link with directly connected routes. Directly connected route determination is a L3 concept that checks for how many hops exist between two routers by tracking the TTL. One of the reasons we wrote the Pv6 Subnet model document was to point out broken OS implementations who had merged the Neighbor cache with the Destination cache (FIB).
Hemant -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brian Haberman Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 4:48 AM To: ipv6@ietf.org Subject: Re: 6man discussion on /127 document @ IETF78 On 7/28/10 8:28 PM, Miya Kohno wrote: > Hi Chris, > > According to the rfc4861, "off-link" is defined as follows: "the > opposite of "on-link"; an address that is not assigned to any > interfaces on the specified link." > > BGP checks if an eBGP peer is directly connected by comparing the > peer address against directly connected interface addresses. > > So I was afraid it could be incompatible. I don't think it is. Router implementations that I am familiar with do not use the NDP prefix state (on- or off-link) to determine if a BGP peer is directly connected. Regards, Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
