In your previous mail you wrote: > => RFC 3849 is different because it wants to limit the scope of the > doc prefix. In KHI we simply don't want to see the prefix in IP headers > so the requirement (don't route) is stronger than filtering. RFC 3849 seems to be very similar imho, as it suggests using packet filters to stop forwarding, as well as filtering the prefix from routing. => RFC 3849 implements a limit (so your term stop is not fully correct), KHI implements an interdiction.
You shouldn't see the documentation prefix in the src or dst of any packet. => this is not true at all: inside a documentation site the documentation prefix is virtually routed. BTW it is not a /64 but a /32. Placing a requirement directly on routers is a lot tougher than placing a requirement on the operators. To support the current wording, every router vendor would have to update their code, => no, this needs only configuration. Furthermore, it's nicer to keep the core forwarding simple => it is kept simple and BTW the routing table is not hardwired.... Regards [EMAIL PROTECTED] PS: there is something called "martian networks", RFC 3849 and KHI are implemented both by putting the relevant prefix into this list. The only difference is the doc prefix is in the list *by default*. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
