Hi Jinmei,

I am wondering whether you are talking about the duplicate address (/128) or
duplicate prefix. Let us say, you have an address configured using DHCP
with differe IID and if you are using SLAAC using differe IID but same
prefix; is this okay?

-Syam



----- Original Message ----- 
From: <JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL PROTECTED]@C#:H (B <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 3:10 PM
Subject: [rfc2462bis] a minor nit in creation of global addresses


> I've been editing a new version of rfc2462bis, mainly addressing AD
> comments, and I found one minor issue in Section 5.5.3 (creation of
> global addresses using RA):
>
> According to rfc2462bis-06, step (d) of the procedure can be
> represented as follows:
>
> d-1 check whether the prefix in RA is equal to the prefix of an address
>     stateless autoconfiguration in the address list
> d-2 if not, do some sanity checks, and form an address by concatenating
>     the prefix with the interface identifier
> d-3 add the new address to the list
>
> But what if an address identical which is not configured by stateless
> autoconfiguration (i.e., either manually or by DHCPv6) happens to be
> identical to the address being configured?  The check in d-1 cannot
> detect this since it only checks the prefix of a
> stateless-autoconfigured address (note that this restriction is one of
> rfc2462bis clarifications based on the wg consensus).  A naive
> implementation would configure duplicated addresses, which should not
> be the appropriate behavior (I actually made this mistake in my
> initial attempt of implementing rfc2462bis).
>
> Original RFC2462 also seems to have this issue, while the point is
> vaguer due to its own unclear wording.
>
> Such conflict should be rare, but I believe it makes sense to note
> this explicitly in rfc2462bis.  The appropriate behavior in this case
> might also be controversial, but I think the natural reaction is to
> simply avoid configuring the duplicate address.
>
> So, I'd like to propose to revise the last paragraph of bullet (d) of
> Section 5.5.3 from:
>
>       If an address is formed successfully, the host adds it to the list
>       of addresses assigned to the interface, initializing its preferred
>       and valid lifetime values from the Prefix Information option.
>
> to:
>
>       If an address is formed successfully and the address is not yet in
>       the list, the host adds it to the list of addresses assigned to
>       the interface, initializing its preferred and valid lifetime
>       values from the Prefix Information option.  Note that the check
>       against the prefix performed at the beginning of this step cannot
>       always detect the address conflict in the list.  It could be
>       possible that an address already in the list, configured either
>       manually or by DHCPv6, happens to be identical to the newly
>       created address whereas such a case should be atypical.
>
> Comments?
>
> JINMEI, Tatuya
> Communication Platform Lab.
> Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to