Alexander Aring <aahringo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Mathis Marion <mathis.marion@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > However, my
>> observations suggest that it is actually not the case when >
>> forwarding packets. Instead, the IPv6 header of the packet is modified
>> > in a way which violates the IPv6 specification (RFC 8200 section 4):
>>
>> I have not sat down to read the code to understand what it actually
>> does, so I can't really comment at this point. I salute you for
>> having gotten into whether the code is compliant.
>>
>> But, I did write spend way too much of my life writing
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9008/ to deal with the perception
>> that RPL networks had to violate 8200.
>>
>> I know that Linux does not (yet) deal with all the minutia in 9008. I
>> wish that I had time to fix that.
> To put everything into IPIP and back is not a question of doing a
> iptunnel ip6tnl [0] and doing the right configuration... just do get
> everything over "the internet" which I think is the whole reason why
> putting everything into IPIP?
I agree that modelling it an infinite series of iptunnel/ip6tnl is the wrong approach.
I would model it akin to how ND and ARP work: something that happens which
then resolves into some bytes that get prefixed and/or removed.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
