Subject: Clarification on VRRPv6

From: MADAN GANESH V <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:04:23 +0530

Hello,

I had implemented the VRRPv4 as my college project last year. Now, i'm
in the phase of implementing VRRPv6(Draft). I seek some clarification so
that we can understand VRRP even better.

Can anyone please clarify me on the following :

>5.3.4  Priority
>   The priority value zero (0) has special meaning indicating that the
>   current Master has stopped participating in VRRP.  This is used to
>   trigger Backup routers to quickly transition to Master without having
>   to wait for the current Master to timeout.
	Why/When should a master stop participating in VRRP.

>5.3.6  Authentication Data 1 and Data 2 :
	o why do we send the Authentication Data 1 and 2 by default,
	  even the Authentication type is not equal to 0. Can't we have 
	  an  Authentication extension kind of thing here. Depending on 
	  Authentication type, we can add this as extension to VRRP packet.
	o If Authentication type is not ZERO, then why SHOULD we set Auth. 
	  Data1 and Data2 to ZERO.

>5.3.5	Reserved bits
	o why SHOULD we set this to ZERO on transmission since it is going 
	  to be ignored on reception. It can contain any data right.

>In Stateless Autoconfiguration, can we generate IPv6 address using VMAC address. ?
IPv6 ->	| Network Prefix | VMAC Address |

>Can a VRRP route be MOBILE ?

Thanks in advance,
Madan

P.S : Please let me know where can i get the archived VRRP queries.

---

From: Thomas Dalton <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 09:28:56 -0000

Hi Madan,

Comments inline:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: MADAN GANESH V [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 5:34 AM
> To: VRRP wg
> Cc: Madan Ganesh V
> Subject: Clarification on VRRPv6
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 

e.g. When a VRRP Master is deconfigured. Rather than waiting for a master
down time, a Backup can wait for just its skew time to take over after
receiving a zero priority hello.

> 	  Authentication type, we can add this as extension to 

I assume you're suggesting some sort of TLV method here? I will leave
somebody else to comment on this.

> 	o If Authentication type is not ZERO, then why SHOULD 

I assume because if the "should"s are ignored, the receiver of the packet
will assume that the packet is authenticated, and will therefore drop it
when authentication fails. In fact, I don't know why they aren't "must"s
here.

> 	  to be ignored on reception. It can contain any data right.

I will leave someone else to comment on this. I assume this is a "should"
because it is good practice to do so - less error prone, rather like
initialising all your variables when you write code.

Again, I'll leave someone else to comment on your other questions:

HTH,
Tom.