Dear all, I would like to know if any body of you has already experienced misbehaviour of 3Com (Ethernet) NICs when experimenting with MIPL, NEPL or simply IPv6...
For the moment, I can tell from three observations: 1/ Some time ago, I had a problem with a simple Nemo implementation based on MIPL 1.0. The problem was that the CoA expired without being renewed (the RAs continued to be sent), and thus the BU expired as well and the mobility support failed. 2/ Last week, I assisted a partner who expirienced problems to setup a NEPL 0.2 platform in this lab with a correct configuration (addresses, radvd, nemod). The problem as that when nemod was switched on (on a visisted network), it started quite well but did not at all recognize that it was conencted to a visited link, totally ignoring the RAs and not configuring a Stateless Address. Regarding the behaviour and output of nemod, it was as if the MR was totally isolated, not connected. However, we are sure that the configuration was correct because after replacing the 3Com NICs he used, everything worked perfect immediately. 3/ When setting up a NEPL platform with (Nautlilus6) MCoA support, I used a 3Com NIC as second egress interface, besides 2 Intel NICs as first egress and as ingress interface. Basic NEPL worked fine, only using the Intel cards. However, when deploying NEPL+MCoA with the 3Com card, it started well, registered both CoAs with the HA, but as soon as there was any movement (disconnection from the visited link, HO to another visisted link) on one of the egress interfaces, nemoed did not always correctly de-register the old CoA or not correctly register the new one, letting expire one or both bindings. Then, each time when trying to stop the deaemon (Ctrl-C in debug level 10), I realized that it was somehow stuck: It displayed "SIGINT received", but did not go any further, i.e. did not exit properly. Also, the tunnel(s) set up by the daemon were not erased, but continued to exist after killing the (stuck) daemon We did not have the time to analyse in detail this strange behaviour, but it might be due to incorrect handling of RAs.. In any case, if somebody has had similar problems or even found a workaround, I owuld be pleased to hear about that! Best regards, Tobias
_______________________________________________ mipl mailing list [email protected] http://www.mobile-ipv6.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mipl
