dhcpcd-discuss

Re: Handling of RAs with no "public" addresses

Roy Marples

Wed Jul 15 12:43:40 2015

Hi Juliusz

On 14/07/2015 23:41, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> If I understand commit f20a30175f correctly, the new behaviour is:
> 
>   - under Linux, RAs with no usable prefixes are always honoured;
>   - under BSD, RAs with no usable prefixes are always dropped.

I can now replicate the original problem on my Gentoo box as well, so I
will probably revert the above change, or at least enable the #define
globally. Maybe Arch Linux has a kernel fix where this worked.

> I think there is one case where the latter point is incorrect: if the RA
> is a retraction, i.e. has a Default Router Lifetime equal to 0.  In that
> case, the default route should be removed (or switched to a different
> router) even under BSD.

Well, it should be doing this. If not it's a bug and I'll have to
revisit how I handle ignoring the RA.

> In case you're interested -- this is due to HNCP work[1], where the
> Default Router Lifetime depends on the presence of a default route in the
> routing protocol.
> 
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-homenet-hncp

Interesting.
You're using dhcpcd for this?

Roy

PS sorry for the laggy relies at the moment, life is very hectic right now.

Follow-Ups:
Re: Handling of RAs with no "public" addressesJuliusz Chroboczek
References:
Handling of RAs with no "public" addressesJuliusz Chroboczek
Archive administrator: postmaster@marples.name