On 7 Nov 2013, at 23:33, Jen Linkova <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Brian E Carpenter > <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> I suspect it's some of each. The host should, I should think, set the hop >>> limit to one on any packet that is to a link-local address, to ensure that >>> the packet is not repeated by a broken router (apart from protocols that >>> ask to have it set to 255 and have the receiving host check for that >>> value). Also, upstream network's BCP 38 implementation sounds suspect, and >>> I'm with Jen in wondering why a router forwarded the packet in the first >>> place. >> >> Are you sure these packets come from hosts? There is a known case >> which is a router generating ICMP reply packets that has no GUA >> configured since all its peers are link-local. > > I saw packets with link-local source/GUA destination coming from hosts > and from routers (I analyzed EUI-64-based IIDs) back in 2011. Now > majority of such traffic is TCP to our services and, again, IID checks > shows that these packets are from hosts.
Any specifc clues by vendor? Tim _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
