Comment # 2
on bug 10673
from [email protected]
(In reply to João Valverde from comment #1)
> (In reply to boaz.brickner from comment #0)
> > Created attachment 13237 [details]
> > IPv6 RPL Routing Header with Mobile IP Routing Header
> >
> > Build Information:
> > Version 1.12.1 (v1.12.1-0-g01b65bf from master-1.12)
> >
> > Copyright 1998-2014 Gerald Combs <[email protected]> and contributors.
> > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
> > warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
> >
> > Compiled (64-bit) with GTK+ 2.24.23, with Cairo 1.10.2, with Pango 1.34.0,
> > with
> > GLib 2.38.0, with WinPcap (4_1_3), with libz 1.2.5, with SMI 0.4.8, with
> > c-ares
> > 1.9.1, with Lua 5.2, without Python, with GnuTLS 3.1.22, with Gcrypt 1.6.0,
> > without Kerberos, with GeoIP, with PortAudio V19-devel (built Sep 16 2014),
> > with
> > AirPcap.
> >
> > Running on 64-bit Windows 7 Service Pack 1, build 7601, with WinPcap version
> > 4.1.3 (packet.dll version 4.1.0.2980), based on libpcap version 1.0 branch
> > 1_0_rel0b (20091008), GnuTLS 3.1.22, Gcrypt 1.6.0, without AirPcap.
> > Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3550 CPU @ 3.30GHz, with 16345MB of physical
> > memory.
> >
> >
> > Built using Microsoft Visual C++ 10.0 build 40219
> >
> > Wireshark is Open Source Software released under the GNU General Public
> > License.
> >
> > Check the man page and http://www.wireshark.org for more information.
> > --
> > Discovered while working on Pcap.Net (http://pcapdot.net).
> >
> > In the attached pcap file, there's a single IPv6 packet that includes a few
> > extension headers.
> > The first extension header is a Mobile IP Routing Header, with Home Address
> > 7df4:9a44:d165:c90c:906a:2d2d:4632:1f72.
> > The second extension header is a an RPL Routing Header, with CmprI = 2.
> > According to RFC 6554, this means that the first two octets of the non-last
> > addresses in the RPL Routing Header should come from the IPv6 destination
> > address (e48f:ce5:4065:25d4:bbb0:114a:e6bc:5c8a), so it should take e48f.
>
> I'm not sure that's true. I think RFC 6554 assumes (correctly) that there
> won't be more than one routing header present so it uses "IPv6 destination
> address" to mean "final destination of whatever weird combination of routing
> headers precedes it".
What is the "final destination of whatever weird combination of routing
headers precedes it" in the given example?
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.