On 2012-01-03 16:00, Michael Richardson wrote: >>>>>> "Brian" == Brian E Carpenter <Brian> writes: > >> Must support a "walled-garden" network. This might routing based > >> on either source address (from the walled garden network) or > >> destination address (to the walled garden network); support for > >> both is not required. > > Brian> I thought that the IETF was about the Internet, so we > Brian> shouldn't be assisting the creation of walled > Brian> gardens. However, source-address-based selection of the next > > No, the IETF is about commuication using the internet (suite of) protocols.
RFC 3935 says otherwise. > The Internet is just the biggest garden out there. > > Not supporting walled gardens (which are globally uniquely numbered, but > not globally reachable) leads to NAT66 at the border gateways. It leads to RFC 4864 actually, which some people objected to violently for exactly that reason. > (And, we still don't seem to accept packets from Mars. All sorts of > advice about doing Martian filtering...) Right, but those packets aren't exactly in the spirit of RFC 3935 either. In any case - my point was that we don't need to make statements about walled gardens in order to derive the need for source-based routing decisions. We need that anyway, for multihoming-without-ipv6nat. Brian _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
