Bill Fenner wrote:
> On 6/2/06, Joe Touch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Do you recall what was the case that motivates the condition ("IF")
>> regarding how TTLs interact with forwarding on the head and tail of
>> tunnels?
>
> I was only peripherally involved, but my recollection is that the
> intent was to make a host<->host tunnel look the same as a physical
> point-to-point interface. The TTL decrement that it refers to is
> simply the TTL decrement that you would perform during IP forwarding,
> and you're not doing IP forwarding if you originated the packet on the
> tunnel interface.Agreed - or if you terminate it at the tunnel interface. > (Talking about this is a little tough without shared terminology for > some of these concepts. Steve Deering drew me a picture long, long > ago which I always wanted to turn into ASCII art for an I-D but never > did.) > > Given that, the BITW implementation should decrement the TTL if it > thinks it's a router, or not if it is pretending to be part of the > host. Right - I had actually expected that to happen as part of the forwarding step of the IP payload at the tunnel egress. Thanks, Joe
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
