Dave Thaler wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 1:48 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: IPv6 subnet-local addresses and
> draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-
> > v3-10.txt
> >
> > Dave Thaler wrote:
> > >>From: Brian Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > >>
> > >>>>The more I think about it, the more I realize that "automagically"
> > >>>>creating the subnet-local scope zone id isn't going to work.
> > >>>>Especially with multiple prefixes per interface.
> > >>>
> > >
> > > Why not? Can you elaborate?
> > > Shouldn't it always be true that if any two interfaces have the
> > > same (non-link-local) subnet prefix, then their subnet-local
> > > zone id MUST be the same?
> >
> > What happens to the zone ids when:
> >
> > 1. Interface 1 has prefix1 and prefix2
> > 2. Interface 2 has prefix1 and prefix3
> > 3. Interface 3 has prefix2 and prefix4
>
> According to the default rule, all three are in the
> same subnet-local zone. You've just chosen for some
> reason not to advertise some prefixes on some links.
> Personally, I'd put this in the category of "don't do that",
> just like I wouldn't recommend using using different subnet
> ids for different prefixes on the same link.
Why are some prefixes not advertised?
What happens if prefix3 is FE80:1:2:3::/64 and Interfaces 2&3 have
different site-local zone ids? Then obviously you can't make all
three interfaces be in the same subnet-local zone id.
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
