> > I quote yourself on a previous mail on this thread: > > "The problems of this assumption are discussed in section 3 > of Alain's draft. The draft suggests that this assumption > should be removed from ND specs. Here is the suggestion: > [snipped but it's read as..."remove" and "remove"...] > This seems like a reasonable suggestion, any objections?" > > As I've already said, I think that on-link communications might > be a useful thing to have.
=> Please specify a scenario that would not work if we remove this statement. The only one I know that wouuld not work is the one I mentioned earlier: one link, _no_ default router and different hosts are _manually_ configured with different prefixes. If you want that to work then configure the hosts with the same prefix. That way they all know that they're on the same link. If you know of something else that would break by removing this statement please describe it. Hesham -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
