XPost: comp.arch.embedded   
   From: gah@ugcs.caltech.edu   
      
   In comp.protocols.tcp-ip Martijn Lievaart  wrote:   
   > On Sun, 06 Feb 2011 20:44:39 +0100, Morten Reistad wrote:   
      
   >> So, if I assign [1:2:3:4::1/64] to an interface, the address   
   >> [1:2:3:4:5::1] is assumed to be on that subnet, and you can use arp to   
   >> get to it.   
      
   > No you cannot. Arp is an IPv4 thingy, IPV6 uses multicast instead. But   
   > otherwise your explanation is correct if we substitute either IPv4 for   
   > IPv6, or multicast for arp.   
      
   That isn't quite right.  IPv6 uses NDP instead of ARP, but it does   
   pretty much the same thing.   
      
   NDP uses multicast instead of the broadcast used by ARP.  The latter   
   was a mistake, and it is nice to see it fixed.  Well, by now IP   
   is the dominant protocol, but you can run other protocols on   
   ethernet, and it isn't nice for all the non-IP hosts to have   
   to process and discard all the ARP packets.   
      
   -- glen   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)