Erik, >> To me the FreeBSD is the obviously correct behavior. They are supposed >> to be interface-local, hence not arriving from somewhere else. There >> could be security implications with applications using this to pass >> packets between them and not expecting that a forged packet could be >> arriving from the outside. Checking the source address is not sufficient >> IMO. > > Submitted errata: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4291&eid=3480
you don't think the text in RFC4007 is clear enough? cheers, Ole > >> On 2/7/2013 9:26 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: >>> But this is speculative. HAve you seen it in practice? Which protocol >>> makes common use of ff01::/64? > > Yes, There's a long story originating from a Java/JDK bug, where it fails to > bind sockets to a link-local multicast address. The desperate designer started > using ff01::/16 addresses instead, which worked on Linux. > > //E > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------
