Am Mon, 16 Sep 2013 10:44:01 +0100 schrieb Simon Kelley <si...@thekelleys.org.uk>:
> SLAAC works by generating addresses by composing the prefix and the > so-called Interface Identifier. > > RFC-4291 says: "For all unicast addresses, except those that start > with the binary value 000, Interface IDs are required to be 64 bits > long and to be constructed in Modified EUI-64 format." > > and RFC-4862 says: "If the sum of the prefix length and interface > identifier length does not equal 128 bits, the Prefix Information > option MUST be ignored." > > from which I deduce that the prefix length MUST be 64 when using > SLAAC. Hm, ok. Seems I have been wrong, the RFCs are indeed pretty clear about that. > If you read the RFCs in detail, it is (as usual) rather more > complicated than that, but I think that for all practical purposes in > the situations where dnsmasq is used, it's true. Probably you’re right. > Looking at the code, simply removing the test in src/option.c is all > that's required to remove the restriction, the code that generates > router advertisements doesn't seem to depend on prefix-length==64. > It's not been tested though, so no promises. Given the RFCs seem to enforce the 64-bit prefix length, it’s unlikely clients will get another prefix length right, even if dnsmasq would generate the RAs as expected. Thanks for the information anyway. Btw. dnsmasq is great :-) Greetings, Marvin -- Blog: http://www.quintilianus.eu ASCII-Ribbon-Kampagne () | ASCII Ribbon Campaign () - Stoppt HTML-E-Mail /\ | - Against HTML E-Mail /\ - Stoppt proprietäre Anhänge | - Against proprietary attachments www.asciiribbon.org/index-de.html | www.asciiribbon.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss
