Mark Smith <i...@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org> writes:
> I think a "prefix redirect" mechanism is justified because it provides > more optimal forwarding for inter-CPE traffic. I only brought up > the LI issue and addressed it because that seemed to be the only > objection there was to the idea when I suggested it before. I don't > think it is a valid concern, and if the IETF has decided not to > consider LI type requirements, then it is one less thing any drafts have > to address and document. A prefix redirect is a minor performance optimization over the current redirects we have. I remain skeptical that such a redirect is needed and provides sufficient value. Note that this is not the first time such a redirect was suggested. It's been discussed in the past, but there was never really enough support for it to go forward. As always, what exactly is the problem that needs solving here? I'm not talking about a generic "possible" performance benenfit in "some cases". What specifically do we see happening in real (or planned) deployments that justifies this sort of enhancement? Thomas -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
