On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 07:46:04 -0700 Jim Burwell <[email protected]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 4/26/2010 03:36, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, Owen DeLong wrote: > > > >> I fail to see how link local is any more difficult than any > >> other IPv6 address. > > > > They're different because you have to know your local network > > interface name as well. > > > >> Windows might get interesting as windows interface naming is, > >> uh, creative at best. > > > > Exactly. > > > Installation software could make this easy. It could either prompt > the user to type in the address on a sticker then enumerate all > interfaces on the system and attempt to contact the router on each NIC. > > Another possibility is that it could enumerate all the interfaces, > then use the IPv6 link-local scope all routers multicast (ff02::2) to > enumerate a list of routers found on each link, sort them and/or > filter them by ethernet OUI, and present a list of choices for the > user to click on to configure the router. The user could also easily > match the enet address on a little slip of paper or sticker on the > router to this list, or through some initial settings on the router > which allow info to be pulled from it somehow, present a list of > unconfigured routers, etc, etc. > > Point is, I can imagine a lot of ways this could be made user-proof > via software/firmware combination that requires no advanced networking > knowledge. >
It's called multicast DNS. It's easier for that to deal just with vanilla IPv6 addresses (i.e. via application calls to getaddrinfo()), rather than IPv6 LL addrs + interface names. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvVpywACgkQ2fXFxl4S7sSCuwCg07Gwxz6NDYuTkVYr5gP5LUMC > n4EAoIdqZQ7C/01X0EcV3vnZiTD4b7Vc > =hDQN > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > >
