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
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:03:51AM +0100, Ole Troan wrote:
you don't think the text in RFC4007 is clear enough?
It doesn't explicitly say that packets sent to ff01::/16
must be dropped if originated from another host. Only that it
is useful only for loopback delivery of multicasts within
a
Le 06/02/2013 21:54, Roland Bless a écrit :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
Hi Michael,
On 06.02.2013 19:23, Michael Richardson wrote:
TM == TM Bless writes:
RFC4291 is clear that packets destined to ff01::/16 must never
leave the local node, but what should be done if such
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:44:22AM +0100, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Also, the implementation of that dropping may not be that
straightforward as at a quick first sight.
A stack presented with a packet whose dst's leftmost 16bits precisely
match ff01::/16 should be dropped _only_ if the src
Le 07/02/2013 13:49, Erik Hugne a écrit :
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:44:22AM +0100, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Also, the implementation of that dropping may not be that
straightforward as at a quick first sight.
A stack presented with a packet whose dst's leftmost 16bits
precisely match
On 2/7/2013 9:26 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Le 07/02/2013 13:49, Erik Hugne a écrit :
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:44:22AM +0100, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Also, the implementation of that dropping may not be that
straightforward as at a quick first sight.
A stack presented with a packet
On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 09:58:51AM -0800, Stig Venaas wrote:
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
RFC4291 is clear that packets destined to ff01::/16 must never leave
the local node, but what should be done if such packets are received
as a result from a broken implementation on the other side?
//E
IETF IPv6 working group
Hi,
On 06.02.2013 17:20, Erik Hugne wrote:
RFC4291 is clear that packets destined to ff01::/16 must never leave
the local node, but what should be done if such packets are received
as a result from a broken implementation on the other side?
Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in
TM == TM Bless writes:
RFC4291 is clear that packets destined to ff01::/16 must never
leave the local node, but what should be done if such packets are
received as a result from a broken implementation on the other
side?
TM Be liberal in what you accept, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Michael,
On 06.02.2013 19:23, Michael Richardson wrote:
TM == TM Bless writes:
RFC4291 is clear that packets destined to ff01::/16 must never
leave the local node, but what should be done if such packets
are received as a result from a
11 matches
Mail list logo
