From gothwal at iitg.ernet.in Sat Apr 2 15:03:01 2005 From: gothwal at iitg.ernet.in (Bhupendra Gothwal) Date: Sat Apr 2 15:05:02 2005 Subject: [radvd-devel-l] multiple RAs Message-ID: dear friends i am having problem while working with the test bed for mobile ipv6. in my case there are 1) one mobile node (MN) 2) two router (home router(R) and foreign router(AR)) 3) one home agent (HA) i am in my home net but still i am receiving router advertisment from both the router.thus my MN interface is assigning care of address(by auto configuration) corresponding to both of the router. that is even i am in the home net i am getting two care of address. one bye my home router and other by foreign router. can nebody tell me how to avoid addess autoconfiguration with the other router and doing it only with home router. bye bhupee From pekkas at netcore.fi Sat Apr 2 15:57:36 2005 From: pekkas at netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Sat Apr 2 15:57:58 2005 Subject: [radvd-devel-l] multiple RAs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Bhupendra Gothwal wrote: > i am having problem while working with the test bed for mobile > ipv6. > in my case there are > 1) one mobile node (MN) > 2) two router (home router(R) and foreign router(AR)) > 3) one home agent (HA) > > i am in my home net but still i am receiving router advertisment from both > the router.thus my MN interface is assigning care of address(by auto > configuration) corresponding to both of the router. > that is even i am in the home net i am getting two care of address. > one bye my home router and other by foreign router. > > can nebody tell me how to avoid addess autoconfiguration with the other > router and doing it only with home router. This doesn't seem to have anything to do with radvd, but.. Maybe you should co-locate the Home Agent with Home Router -- so that you would not get the router advertisement through the MN-HA tunnel when you're at home? -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings From greg.daley at eng.monash.edu.au Sun Apr 3 20:57:18 2005 From: greg.daley at eng.monash.edu.au (Greg Daley) Date: Sun Apr 3 20:58:02 2005 Subject: [radvd-devel-l] multiple RAs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <425090EE.7020402@eng.monash.edu.au> Hi, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Bhupendra Gothwal wrote: > >> i am having problem while working with the test bed for mobile >> ipv6. >> in my case there are >> 1) one mobile node (MN) >> 2) two router (home router(R) and foreign router(AR)) >> 3) one home agent (HA) >> >> i am in my home net but still i am receiving router advertisment from >> both >> the router.thus my MN interface is assigning care of address(by auto >> configuration) corresponding to both of the router. >> that is even i am in the home net i am getting two care of address. >> one bye my home router and other by foreign router. >> >> can nebody tell me how to avoid addess autoconfiguration with the other >> router and doing it only with home router. > > > This doesn't seem to have anything to do with radvd, but.. > > Maybe you should co-locate the Home Agent with Home Router -- so that > you would not get the router advertisement through the MN-HA tunnel when > you're at home? I think Pekka is on the right track: this is a deployment issue. One router taking both functions HA and AR is likely to work well. If you need to have two routers, the Home Agent doesn't necessarily have to be an advertising router. In fact, your home agent may be set up so that it's impossible to visit the home network (try a dummy interface as the home network) Another option is to allow the Home Agent to be the only advertising router on the Home link. Neither of the above options will work particularly well if the Router and the HA don't trust each other for route exchange. A final option is to advertise exactly the same prefix as the router (with a different router suffix) for the Home Network prefix. The HA can proxy addresses out of the subnet easily, and may advertise similar lifetime values to the other router. It may be useful to lower the HA's advertised preference if it otherwise isn't connected to the routing infrastructure though. Greg From thorsten.kuefer at uni-muenster.de Fri Apr 8 04:39:20 2005 From: thorsten.kuefer at uni-muenster.de (Thorsten Kuefer (JOIN)) Date: Sat Jul 16 18:26:18 2005 Subject: [radvd-devel-l] Fwd: Re: RADVD PATCH: send zero router lifetime when exiting In-Reply-To: <200504071322.21341.thorsten.kuefer@uni-muenster.de> References: <200504071322.21341.thorsten.kuefer@uni-muenster.de> Message-ID: <200504081038.59381.thorsten.kuefer@uni-muenster.de> Subject: Re: RADVD PATCH: send zero router lifetime when exiting Date: Donnerstag 07 April 2005 14:54 From: Pekka Savola To: "Thorsten Kuefer (JOIN)" On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Thorsten Kuefer (JOIN) wrote: > I am doing some renumbering tests with IPv6 using radvd. Thereby I noticed > the feature that the default route is removed when exiting radvd. I think > for a hardware router RFC2461bis section 6.2.5 sound reasonable but a > software like radvd should at least give a configuration option for this to > the user. In my scenario I would like to keep the advertised default route > until it expires. I can see this may cause issues in some case, but there are problems as well. For example, with multiple routers on the link, all advertising as a default router, removing the route by a failing router seems to make sense. Maybe there could be a config option not to remove the default route, but I'm a bit uncomfortable doing this because it's in the spec, and implemented by others this way as well (at least in KAME). Maybe this should be brought up in the ipv6@ietf.org list? At least, it might make sense for you to send this on radvd-devel-l list if some folks have opinions about this either way. > There are also some other cases e.g. when radvd is accidentally killed or > dies unexpectedly where all clients would loose IPv6 connectivity even if > routing could continue without problems. Note that this doesn't happen if radvd would dump core or killed with KILL signal, because the code to remove the default route would not get executed. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings