> I think this scenario is useful for IPv6 small-devices, so I > don't quite agree > with you all. > > I feel that we are undoing a lot of things and we will end > up with no > autoconfiguration features at all. This might be a good thing > for sysadmins, though.
=> I don't think we're undoing any autoconfig here. This is a clarification to avoid other problems without eliminating autoconfig. > > If I understand the onlinkassumption draft well, the main drawback > of sending packets on-link is that some malicious party would > be able to grab those packets. => IMHO, that was not the main issue. I saw bigger issues in that draft. I thought the biggest two were: - impacts on address selection (section 3.1) - Address resolution delays (section 3.2) Hesham -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
