At Fri, 11 Jan 2008 09:52:27 +0900, Yukiyo Akisada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a question about RFC 4862 Section 5.4.5. > Please let me confirm about it. > > It says, > > 909 If the address is a link-local address formed from an interface > 910 identifier based on the hardware address, which is supposed to be > 911 uniquely assigned (e.g., EUI-64 for an Ethernet interface), IP > 912 operation on the interface SHOULD be disabled. > > Does the word 'hardware address' here mean MAC address itself? > Or the address which is assigned physically at the factory? I'd say it's the latter, according to the background idea of this rule (which is described in that same section). Consider the case where two different hosts located in the same link are manually configured with the same Ethernet (MAC) address and the same link-local address is configured for these two interfaces. Then DAD will detect the duplication of the link-local address, implicitly revealing the conflict of the MAC address. This section intends to detect such a case and avoid subsequent disruption caused by keeping the conflicted MAC address. Whether it's a "real" hardware address or not doesn't matter in this sense. So, > When DAD fails for IP address based on software-based MAC address, > should the system disable IP operation on also that interface? the answer to this question is YES. --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
