On Mar 29, 2013, at 10:52, Mark Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes. NUD is performed on the link-local addresses used as the source 
> addresses for the MLDv2 messages.

RFC 4861 says:

   Neighbor Unreachability Detection detects the failure of a neighbor
   or the failure of the forward path to the neighbor.  Doing so
   requires positive confirmation that packets sent to a neighbor are
   actually reaching that neighbor and being processed properly by its
   IP layer.  Neighbor Unreachability Detection uses confirmation from
   two sources.  When possible, upper-layer protocols provide a positive
   confirmation that a connection is making "forward progress", that is,
   previously sent data is known to have been delivered correctly (e.g.,
   new acknowledgments were received recently).  When positive
   confirmation is not forthcoming through such "hints", a node sends
   unicast Neighbor Solicitation messages that solicit Neighbor
   Advertisements as reachability confirmation from the next hop.  To
   reduce unnecessary network traffic, probe messages are only sent to
   neighbors to which the node is actively sending packets.

See also
7.3.1.  Reachability Confirmation

   In some cases (e.g., UDP-based protocols and routers forwarding
   packets to hosts), such reachability information may not be readily
   available from upper-layer protocols.  When no hints are available
   and a node is sending packets to a neighbor, the node actively probes
   the neighbor using unicast Neighbor Solicitation messages to verify
   that the forward path is still working.

So your multicast emitters would be NS-pinging their destinations all the time?
Probably not too onerous for your TV scenario (with REACHABLE_TIME at 30 s), 
and a good way to shutdown traffic to a hard-failed receiver before the MLDv2 
timeouts kick in, but
maybe not that great in a constrained network that only occasionally sends 
multicast packets.

(Incidentally, 4861 also says:
   Neighbor Unreachability Detection is performed only for neighbors to
   which unicast packets are sent; it is not used when sending to
   multicast addresses.
So this would then have to be adapted, because it's no longer an either/or with 
6085.)

Grüße, Carsten

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to