A short wrap-up: On 29. jun. 2013, at 22:31, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29/06/2013 22:18, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: >> Hi Phil and list, >> >>> [Using the same link-local address on multiple (VLAN) interfaces] >>> >>> Many routers wouldn't let you do that in IPv4. Cisco IOS doesn't, for >>> example: >> >> IPv4 doesn't have link-local addresses or anything similar (unless you >> want to consider 192.169/16 "similar" in this context). > > Of course not, but I was trying to see how deep in the product > design the issue might go. It sounds like dumb copying of the IPv4 > logic (where as Gert says there is no implied scope and therefore > a real ambiguity). In this particular case the logic that signals that the local OSPF-interface is not ready was copied from IPv4 OSPF to OSPFv3. I've run with a simple test. - Configured two IRB (or BVI or Vlan X, you name it) interfaces or router R1, bot with the same IPv6 link-local address (fe80::10:1:1:1) and no global addresses. - I run OSPFv3 on one of them, the other is just sitting there, like this: tcpdump here | v +----+*fe80::10:1:1:1---OSPF------*+----+ | R1 | | R2 | +----+*fe80::10:1:1:1---no-OSPF---*+----+ ^ | shutdown this interface - OSPFv3 adjacency come up and everything is fine. - Then I drop the non-OSPF link by shutting down the interface on the neighboring side R2. - From the tcpdump at R1 I can see that R1 stops sending OSPF hello messages. R1 says: ipv6 src Address fe80::10:1:1:1 is not ready ...and stops sending OSPF helloes. - OSPF at R1 gets stuck in the Init state. > > Brian Thank you all for all your comments and feedback. Kind regards, Matjaž