[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-vandevelde-v6ops-nap-01.txt]



Hei,

On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Gunter Van de Velde (gvandeve) wrote:
I expected this comment to pop-up ;-), thus i did further research on this with the help of Eric.

The issue is that IPv4 couples _record route_ and _source route_ functionality. IPv6 does not support record route. However, even if the routers do not look to the IPv4 options, I see no reason why the source route part of IPv4 could not still work without the routers looking at the header.


However, I did make a test with this. At least Cisco replies with ICMP source route failed at the first router which has 'no ip source-route' configured.

So, while it might be that the routers might not _have_ to record the route, it's probable that most implementations disable all the source routing when they have something like 'no ip source-route' set.

<snip>
IETF STD5 about the IP protocol itself specifically states that the source route option is used by gateways (and not only by end node):


on page 18:

The loose source and record route (LSRR) option provides a means
for the source of an internet datagram to supply routing
information to be used by the gateways in forwarding the
datagram to the destination, and to record the route
information.

and later on page 21:

When an internet module routes a datagram it checks to see if
the record route option is present.  If it is, it inserts its
own internet address as known in the environment into which this
datagram is being forwarded into the recorded route begining at
the octet indicated by the pointer, and increments the pointer
by four.

<end snip>

My understanding of this is that all routers MUST have a look at the IPv4 options if LSRR is available, and this is different with IPv6.

-- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings