The changlog suggests that this is now handled "correctly". Could you elaborate? What is the difference?

In upgrading an RB450 from -RC3 to -RC7, the IPV6 local network stopped working. It was noted that the link-local addresses assigned to the switched local ports were changed from before and somehow dependent on whether the local port was physically connected. By removing all local connections from the router (except one, of course), the IPV6 local network was restored without any changes to the router configuration. This obviously has something to do with what is mentioned in the changelog.

The local configuration has ether2 as local-master and 3,4 and 5 are local-slaves of ether2.

Can you provide further details? It would be nice to be able to use the switch of the RB450, but some new configuration would seem to be necessary.

Difference between RC3 and RC7 is that in rc7 ipv6 link local address is added only to master interface or bridge. All slaves are ignored.

Difference between RC3 and RC7 is that in rc7 ipv6 link local address is added only to master interface or bridge. All slaves are ignored.

This seems to make sense. One link-local address per interface (and master and slaves are the same logical interface to the router). So why didn't the resulting network continue to work?

Can you confirm that the slave ports without link-local addresses of their own will continue to be usable in an IPV6 local network as if switch-connected? This did not seem to be the case here.

THere is a small bug in rc7 when sometimes radv is still using link local address other than masters address. It is fixed in rc8.

THere is a small bug in rc7 when sometimes radv is still using link local address other than masters address. It is fixed in rc8.

Thank you. That seems to be consistent with what we observed. The workaround for now is not to use the extra router ports as if a switch.