Re: Neighbor Discovery from non-neighbors

[JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <Jinmei_Tatuya at isc.org>]

At Thu, 2 Oct 2008 10:08:07 +0300 (EEST),
Pekka Savola <pekkas at netcore.fi> wrote:

> +		/*
> +		 * According to recent IETF discussions, it is not a good idea
> +		 * to accept a NS from an address which would not be deemed
> +		 * to be a neighbor otherwise.  This point is expected to be
> +		 * clarified in future revisions of the specification.
> +		 */
> 
> I wonder if off-list discussion qualifies as "IETF discussion".  Or 
> has this been raised on a list somewhere?
> 
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet6/nd6_nbr.c.diff?r1=1.52;r2=1.53
> 
> I guess we have a problem.

It was me who suggested the comment, so if the wording surprised you
it was my fault.  I meant by "IETF discussion" a series of e-mail
threads including this one:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg09544.html

and although I've not seen a clear consensus my understanding is that
we at least saw a problematic case in the current specification,
specifically, this bullet of the on-link definition (RFC4861)

                    - any Neighbor Discovery message is received from
                      the address.

that's the rational of "it is not a good idea".

But just as I said I've not seen a consensus about how to deal with
this in the specification, so I only indicated an expectation of
future "clarification".

Aside from the possibly inappropriate comment wording, does that
address your concern?

---
JINMEI, Tatuya
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------