> when there's no link layer address (imagine tunnel interfaces),
> there's no proper NS (packets go out without NS-NA
> exchange), however,
> NUD hapens. is my understanding right?
The MS implementation works that way. For a p2p interface, we create the
neighbor cache entry in the stale state (since we know the link-layer
address a priori), but then NUD can operate.
Here's another scenario along these lines: assign a /64 to a p2p link
between two routers. Now someone sends a packet to an address in the
/64, but the address is not assigned to either router. The routers will
forward the packet back & forth until the hop limit hits zero. This will
happen before NUD has a chance to kick in.
I agree with itojun, better to generate a
destination-unreachable/address-unreachable error instead of forwarding
a packet back out the p2p interface from which it arrived.
Rich
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
