15 Apr 2011 10:57
RFC5798 requires usage of RAs?
Daniel Roesen <dr <at> cluenet.de>
2011-04-15 08:57:09 GMT
2011-04-15 08:57:09 GMT
Hi,
JUNOS (Juniper router firmware) issues warnings when committing config
changes, noting that RAs are not configured for an interface where VRRP
for IPv6 is configured:
vrrpd[15299]: %CONFLICT-0-WARNING: 'router-advertisement' is not configured
for interface ge-9/2/2.662
RFC5798 states:
6.4.3. Master
...
(630) ++ MUST send ND Router Advertisements for the virtual
router.
That makes no sense to us when RAs are generally not used on the
segment, and hosts are manually configured to point to the VRRP virtual
address as default gateway. We do not want to use RAs in some scenarios
at all.
I've found an older posting on this list, where someone raised the same
question (Q-2):
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vrrp/current/msg00763.html
John Cruz' answer seems to clarify, but noone seemed to have envisioned
that the spec lingo actually motivates vendors to assume RAs as being
mandatory when implementing VRRPv6... :-/
RFC5798 states in the introductory section about IPv6 (1.3):
(Continue reading)
RSS Feed