On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 14:59 +0930, Mark Smith wrote: > You seem to only looking at it from the point of view of a traffic > source being onlink and wanting to send to the subnet router anycast > address.
Yes and no. Let me first say that I think anycast is great! I'm not advocating disposing of anycast. And I like the idea of onlink anycast - I just don't want reserved addresses for it! Perhaps someone could enlighten me - is there any way to tell an interface that the address it has is an anycast address? Or is the only way it can know because of the specific addresses used? That is, subnet router address or addresses with the right bits set, i.e., subnet anycast addresses? If there is no way to specify to an interface that an address is an anycast address, then there would seem to be no way to deprecate both subnet router anycast and subnet anycast addresses without also deprecating the whole idea of onlink anycast. I'm starting to wonder whether this is a bigger can of worms than I first thought... Regards, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h) http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob) GPG fingerprint: DA41 51B1 1481 16E1 F7E2 B2E9 3007 14ED 5736 F687 Old fingerprint: B386 7819 B227 2961 8301 C5A9 2EBC 754B CD97 0156
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
