[Dnsmasq-discuss] Adding Route Information Option to prefixes in RA

[Ilya Ponetaev]

Hi
Thanks for valuable information, but just as addition: can you point to 
definite broken implementations which is unable to handle PIO and RIO 
for the same prefix? I can try to test and reproduce it. And what 
exactly do you mean under "same prefix": with same length (for ex. /64) 
or nested (for ex. bunch of /64 in one /48)?
Thanks in advance.

On 09/10/2014 05:52 PM, Steven Barth wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> just stumbled upon this and wanted to add some notes about that because
> I have some experience with RIOs from OpenWrt already. If you want to
> send RIOs because you want to be compliant with RFC 6204/7084 you should
> send them with the prefix that was delegated to the router running
> dnsmasq not the prefix that was actually assigned to the interface (i.e.
> if you get a /56 from the ISP you should announce the /56 as RIO and a
> /64 out of that as PIO to make it work).
>
> In addition and what is probably more critical here: some client
> implementations don't handle PIOs and RIOs for the same prefix very well
> (at least with the most-common prefix-size of /64 that is) and it might
> in some extreme cases even lead to disrupted connectivity between hosts.
> Since I had the fun to debug such a case and want to spare you the
> trouble you might want to have a look at this lengthy thread:
> https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/17396
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Steven
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
> Dnsmasq-discuss at lists.thekelleys.org.uk
> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss

-- 
Best regards,
Ilya Ponetaev
D-Link Corp.