On Mon, 9 Nov 2009, JINMEI Tatuya / ???? wrote:
I'm afraid "has not been implemented" is too strong. In fact, we have "implemented" it in the KAME/BSD IPv6 stack in that we implemented special restrictions (at that time) on anycast addresses and had experimentally assigned subnet-router anycast addresses on PC-based IPv6 routers. In general, it's difficult to declare something hasn't been implemented because it eliminates any minor implementation activity, which is almost impossible to prove.
I agree that the wording is a bit strong, and I'm ok with weakening it, but I've yet to see an implementation that enables it by default or even by an enable/disable configuration directive.
AFAIK, on KAME/BSD it's "implemented" in such a fashion that the operator must manually configure it with "ifconfig". I wouldn't call that "implemented" myself. At least on my FreeBSD 7.2 router, subnet router anycast address isn't configured automatically and I don't even see system configuration parameters (e.g. in init scripts) which would change this.
-- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
