Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:44:06 +0900
From: Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>
Subject: [users:00393] Re: Phase 1 Conformance Test (ICMPv6 Test 6 and offlink NS messages)
To: "Swaminadhan, Subramani" <subramani_swaminadhan@mentor.com>
Cc: users@tahi.org
Message-Id: <20071012084406.fbdbceb9.akisada@tahi.org>
In-Reply-To: <5956D471B8DF784488BE98EA8684058B049067@na2-mail.mgc.mentorg.com>
References: <5956D471B8DF784488BE98EA8684058B049067@na2-mail.mgc.mentorg.com>
X-Mail-Count: 00393

Hi, Subramani.

Please try <http://www.tahi.org/logo/release/Self_Test_1-4-9.tgz>.
Talking about IPv6 Core Protocols, it is the newest.

Regards,

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:40:57 -0600
"Swaminadhan, Subramani" <subramani_swaminadhan@mentor.com> wrote:

> Hello All,
> 
> I am currently testing RFC4443 changes to ICMPv6 using the TAHI IPv6
> Conformance Test for ICMPv6 Phase 1 (Tool Version 3.0.12, Test Program
> Version 2.1.1).  The test keeps failing on ICMPv6 Route Unreachable
> (Test #6) when trying to determine if the NUT sends a valid Destination
> Unreachable (code 0).
> 
> The sequence log for this test shows the following:
> Start
> Initialization
>   Start Caputring Packets (Link0)
>   Send Echo Request (Link-local address)
>   Receive Echo Reply (Link-local address)
>     TN created the entry of TN's link-local address to Neighbor cache of
> NUT.
>   Send Echo Request (Global address)
>   Receive Echo Reply (Global address)
>     TN created the entry of TN's global address to Neighbor cache of
> NUT.
> Test
>   Send Echo Request to an offlink host
>   recv unexpected packet (ICMPv6 Neighbor Solicitation)
>   recv unexpected packet (ICMPv6 Neighbor Solicitation)
>   recv unexpected packet (ICMPv6 Neighbor Solicitation)
>   recv unexpected packet (ICMPv6 Dst Unreach Code 3)
> 
> 
> RFC 2461 specifies:
>    Next-hop determination for a given unicast destination operates as
>    follows.  The sender performs a longest prefix match against the
>    Prefix List to determine whether the packet's destination is on- or
>    off-link.  If the destination is on-link, the next-hop address is the
>    same as the packet's destination address.  Otherwise, the sender
>    selects a router from the Default Router List (following the rules
>    described in Section 6.3.6).  If the Default Router List is empty,
>    the sender assumes that the destination is on-link.
> 
> Going by the above RFC, the IPv6 stack always tries to find a route by
> sending Neighbor Solicitations out of the same interface where a packet
> destined to an off-link host arrived.  I would like to know why the TAHI
> Test Suite thinks sending this NS packet is illegal.  Can someone help
> me determine where the problem is?
> 
> Thanks,
> Subramani
> 
> 
> 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>