(usagi-users 00554) Re: Bug in 2.4.x multicast code?

[Bjorn Lindgren <bjorn.e.lindgren@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 23 May 2001 13:47:08 +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, 23 May 2001 03:47:31 +0900, 
> >>>>> YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> 
> >> I have problems with pinging my link-local address and the common
> >> link-local multicast addresses on the Linux 2.4.x kernel. I have tried
> >> all 2.4.x kernels without success. 2.4.0, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.3 and 2.4.4.
> >> I have no problems with this on Linux 2.2.x, KAME BSD's or Sun Solaris 8.
> 
> > It's FAQ; Specifying interface is mandatory.  Try
> 
> I'm afraid that this reply (of mine) is rather confusing, but
> "interface" is not necessarily a correct wording.  Since "interface"
> is a smaller scope than "link", we just have to specify the "link" for
> sending a packet to a link-local destination.  Specifing "interface"
> is theoretically an overspecification.  However, some systems
> (e.g. KAME/BSD) assume a one-to-one mapping between interfaces and
> links, and thus specifying an interface causes the same result of
> specifing a link.  I don't know USAGI has the same assumption, though.

Seams resonable for multicast addresses, but specifying "link" for
normal interface link-local as fe80::/10 ?

Should'nt the /128 entry pointing to loopback in the routing table
match?

Kernel IPv6 routing table
Destination                    Next Hop    Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
fe80::a00:2bff:fe98:2f62/128   ::          U     0      0        0 lo


- bln