Subject: Mapping between Link Local address and Global address

From: "J�r�me" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:52:52 -0800 (PST)

Hello,

Could someone help me with this:
If an IPv6 interface has both a Link-local and global
addresses, is there any mapping between the global and
Link local address ?
In which section/RFC is it defined ?

Thanks,
Jérôme

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Tony Hain" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:59:30 -0800

No mapping is desired or necessary because they are for use in different
contexts. There may be some consistency between them in the low order 64
bits (interface ID), but it is not required that a node respond to an
address that is derived from another format. See RFC2373 sec 2.5.7 &
2.5.8, or more precisely see draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-07.txt sec
2.5.4 & 2.5.6.

Tony

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Jirtme
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 12:53 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Mapping between Link Local address and Global address
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Jirtme

---

From: Matt Crawford <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 17:17:45 -0600

> J�ér�ôme

draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-name-lookups-08.txt

But your friendly IESG doesn't want you to have that tool in your
hands until you've been told exactly where to point it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:44:34 +0100

In your previous mail you wrote:

=> I take advantage of the occasion to support the ICMPv6 name-lookup
mechanism: this is very useful when a rogue router for instance
sends stupid router advertisements. You know what is its link-local
addresses and using ICMPv6 name-lookups (ping6 -w on BSDs) you get
its name effortlessly (and even when the IPv6 config was completely
messed). This can become a major tool for network management,
thanks Matt!

[email-masked]

PS: recovery is another problem, I'll send a mail about it because
something is needed for it too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Robert Elz <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:19:00 +0700

Date:        Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:44:34 +0100
    From:        Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
    Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>

  | => I take advantage of the occasion to support the ICMPv6 name-lookup
  | mechanism:

Since we're doing this, me2...

Generally making information about a node available painlessly (provided
it is willing to send it of course) is a big step forward.   Let's just
do a WG last call on this doc, then forward it to the IESG.   As I recall
it, it has been sitting around idle for ages now, move it along.

kre