Pascal, ND has always been scoped per interface and so has been RFC 4862. That is why existing routers support configurable redirects per interface. Therefore something that is that clear about ND and Redirect, why do we have to add more text to the node-req-bis document related to per-interface? The text I and Brian Carpenter proposed still makes sense - a router MUST implement Redirect functionality and SHOULD enable Redirect functionality by default. I already said last night, we have shipping routers since the days of RFC 2461 that Enable redirect on a network interface by default because RFC 2461 mandates, a router SHOULD send a Redirect.
Hemant -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Pascal Thubert (pthubert) Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 3:19 AM To: Pekka Savola; Alain Durand Cc: john.lough...@nokia.com; nar...@us.ibm.com; ipv6@ietf.org; Brian E Carpenter; ed.jankiew...@sri.com Subject: RE: Router redirects in Node Requirements document Hi Pekka: Redirect is almost useless on non-transitive links (NBMA) at large, not only P2P. Radios being non-transitive, you'll see more and more of those beasts. And a radio router usually uses only radios. So there's a whole family of routers that have strictly no use of redirect. If we decide to must something, I would thus associate the MUST to the categories of interface that the router supports. Best, Pascal -------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
