#17510: /60 rather than /64 IPv6 'interface' route created on LAN interface
-----------------------------+-----------------------------------
  Reporter:  markzzzsmith@…  |      Owner:  developers
      Type:  defect          |     Status:  reopened
  Priority:  normal          |  Milestone:
 Component:  base system     |    Version:  Barrier Breaker 14.07
Resolution:                  |   Keywords:
-----------------------------+-----------------------------------

Comment (by markzzzsmith@…):

 I'd need to understand the problem better to comment on it. It seems
 you're saying that if you delete an IPv6 address from an interface, the
 automatically created /64 hangs around?

 While on face value that would seem incorrect, however it is quite
 possible for a device to know a /64 prefix is on-link but not to have any
 addresses from within it. Alternatively, it is possible for a host to have
 an address from within a /64, but to assume all other destinations within
 that /64 are off-link (with exception to the link-local prefix) This is
 better explained and clarified in:

 IPv6 Subnet Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet Prefixes
 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5942

 This actually makes the assumption of a /128 when adding a static address
 via 'ip -6 address add <blah>' with no prefix specified consistent with
 that RFC. It specifically states that configuring a static IPv6 address on
 an interface should not automatically create an assumed /64 on-link prefix
 route.

 One other thought in this area. I think there are three separate IPv6
 related addressing functions:

 - address or rather IID generation methods - e.g., use MAC address, or
 hash as per RFC7217 opaque IDs

 - address configuration methods - currently SLAAC, DHCPv6 or static

 - address expiry methods - currently address aging via preferred and valid
 lifetimes

 If you're having trouble with the last one, one trick would be to manually
 set the preferred and valid lifetimes to deprecated values, so that the
 host avoids using them if there are better addresses to use, as per
 RFC3484/RFC6724.

--
Ticket URL: <https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/17510#comment:8>
OpenWrt <http://openwrt.org>
Opensource Wireless Router Technology
_______________________________________________
openwrt-tickets mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-tickets

Reply via email to