netdev - Re: /128 link-local subnet on 6in4 (sit) tunnels?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1364408454.15362.1.camel@localhost>
Date:	Wed, 27 Mar 2013 19:20:54 +0100
From:	Wilco Baan Hofman <wilco@...nhofman.nl>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: /128 link-local subnet on 6in4 (sit) tunnels?

On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 19:11 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 04:37:53PM +0100, Wilco Baan Hofman wrote:
> > 
> > Weird, but sure, here goes:
> > 
> > ip tunnel add tunv6-uplink1 mode sit remote 192.168.1.1 local
> > 192.168.1.21
> > ip link set tunv6-uplink1 up mtu 1472
> 
> In my test I didn't specify the local address so addr.s6_addr32[3]
> seems to be zero.  I'll have to search the RFCs why this is the case.

See section 3.7, rfc4213:

   The interface identifier [RFC3513] for such an interface may be based
   on the 32-bit IPv4 address of an underlying interface, or formed
   using some other means, as long as it is unique from the other tunnel
   endpoint with a reasonably high probability.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4213

-- Wilco

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html