> hi,
>
> A simple question. When would you ever use global source
> and destination addresses for a neighbor solicitation.
> And why?
For an NS it makes sense to use an IP source address that the peer will
try to send packets to so that the NS (with a source link-layer address
option) can create/update the neighbor cache entry on the peer.
If you don't do this you'll end up with twice the number of ND packets
as in
A ---> NS --> B
A <--- NA <-- B
A now has NCE for B
A ---> TCP --> B When B wants to respond it doesn't have a
NCE for A
A <--- NS <-- B
A ---> NA --> B
B now has NCE for A
A <-- TCP <-- B
Also, for NUD you want to probe the actual destination in the NCE by
sending to that unicast address. Thus the destination in a unicast NS
should be a global address if the NCE is for a global address.
> IMO, link local addresses must be used. But RFC 2461 does
> not say this. It just says an address configured to the
> interface. That can mean global addresses. I saw such a
> packet at Connectathon (going on in San Jose).
RFC 2461 should say something consistent with the above somewhere.
E.g section 7.2.2 and reading between the lines in 7.3.3+4.3.
Any suggestions on how it can be made more clear?
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
