Karsten,I have attached the test script (addr.p2/v6LC_3_2_1.seq) and thedefinition for the RS that Tahi is looking for (addr.p2/RA_SAA.def).On line 32, there is this line:%ret2=vRecv($IF,$SAA::wait_rs,0,0,RS_from_NUT,RS_from_NUT_wSLL);RS_from_NUT is defined in (addr.p2/RA_SAA.def) as this:FEM_icmp6_rs(RS_from_NUT,_HETHER_nut2allrouters, { _SRC(nutv6()); _DST(v6(_ALLROUTERS_MCAST_ADDR)); HopLimit=255; }, { })When I change the "_SRC(nutv6());" portion of this definition to be "_SRC(v6(_UNSPEC_ADDR));", the test passes.Thank you,Peter CarneyDevelopment EngineerTreck Inc.-----Original Message-----From: Karsten Keil [mailto:kkeil@suse.de] Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 3:03 PMTo: users@tahi.orgSubject: [users:00706] Re: Invalid Source Address of Router SolicitationOn Fri, May 02, 2008 at 11:43:31AM -0400, Peter Carney wrote:> Karsten,> > Thank you for your response.> > I apologize, but I am still confused as to why the test thinks thatthe> NUT should be using the Link-Local Address for the source address inthe> Router Solicitation.> > The test has received a NS for the LLA, which means that the NUT is in> the process of performing DAD, but it has not yet completed it.> > Is the NUT supposed to use the LLA as the source address of the RSeven> if the NUT has not yet completed DAD for that LLA?> No, of course not, you are right here, but after 4 seconds the RS shouldbe repeated and at this time the DAD for the LLA should be finished Ithink.I think most implementations start sending RS only after successful DADfor the LLA, but on the other hand, you are correct, the RFC does allowsending RS without any address assigned, so it does not need to waitfor the LLA DAD to complete.I think it would make sense to allow also a RS with the unspecifiedaddress, maybe a new frame must be defined for this.I do not think that not sending RS with src=LLA is the reason why thetestfails, because so far I understand the script of this test, it doesn'tfail, if it doesn't receive a RS at all.Maybe you should attach the 27* files for reference.> > > Thank you,> > Peter Carney> Development Engineer> Treck Inc.> -----Original Message-----> From: Karsten Keil [mailto:kkeil@suse.de] > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 9:00 AM> To: users@tahi.org> Subject: [users:00701] Re: Invalid Source Address of RouterSolicitation> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 04:08:40PM -0400, Peter Carney wrote:> > Hello,> > > > > > > > I am running the IPv6 Self Test version 1.4.14 for hosts and I am> having> > trouble with test number 27: "Global Address Autoconfiguration andDAD> > (Host Only)".> > > > > > > > In this test (addr.p2/v6LC_3_2_1.seq) the script waits for a Router> > Solicitation from the NUT:> > > > > > > > #----- RA PHASE> > vLog("TN received DAD NS from NUT.");> > vLog("OK! Let's go ahead!");> > The test did received a DAD (for LLA), so it assumes that> the LLA is assigned.> > > %ret2=vRecv($IF,$SAA::wait_rs,0,0,RS_from_NUT,RS_from_NUT_wSLL);> > > > if ($ret2{status} != 0){> > vLog("Though TN had waited RS from NUT for $SAA::wait_rs,");> > vLog(" NUT seems not to send RS.");> > vLog(" Anyway TN is sending Unsolicited RA (Prefix=Global)");> > }else{> > vLog("TN received RS from NUT.");> > vLog("TN is sending RA (Prefix=Global)");> > }> > > > > > > > The problem that I am seeing is when the NUT sends the Router> > Solicitation with an unspecified source address.> > > > > > > > > In section 4.1 of RFC 2461 it defines the Source Address of theRouter> > Solicitation to be:> > > > "An IP address assigned to the sending interface, or the unspecified> > address if no address is assigned to the sending interface."> > > > But at this time, you should have a valid address assigned, the Link> Local> Address, so this address should be used.> Before waiting for the RS> > > > > > > In 'addr.p2/RA_SAA.def', the 'RS_from_NUT' parameter is defined as:> > > > FEM_icmp6_rs(RS_from_NUT,_HETHER_nut2allrouters,> > > > {> > > > _SRC(nutv6());> > > > _DST(v6(_ALLROUTERS_MCAST_ADDR));> > > > HopLimit=255;> > > > },> > > > {> > > > }> > > > )> > > > > > > > Because of this, the Router Solicitation that the NUT sends thatuses> > the unspecified address is not received and the test fails.> > > > > > > > Can you please confirm that this is a bug and provide a patch?> > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you,> > > > Peter Carney> > Development Engineer> > Treck Inc.> > > > > > > > > > Treck, Inc. - Confidentiality Notice> > > > This electronic transmission may contain information that is> proprietary or> > confidential. You are hereby notified that any dissemination,> > distribution or duplication of this electronic transmission to some> other> > entity, without the expressed written consent of Treck, Inc. is> strictly> > prohibited, unless the contents of this electronic transmission> > specifically authorizes you to do so. If your receipt of this> electronic> > transmission is in error, please notify the corporate offices of> Treck,> > Inc. immediately by calling (513) 528-5732, or by reply to> > this transmission.> > > > > > -- > Karsten Keil> SuSE Labs> ISDN and VOIP development> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr.5 90409 Nuernberg, GF: MarkusRex,> HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)> > -- Karsten KeilSuSE LabsISDN and VOIP developmentSUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr.5 90409 Nuernberg, GF: Markus Rex,HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)707_2.seq
707_3.def