On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:24:43 -0400 "Ricky Beam" <jfb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:43:39 -0400, Mark Smith > <na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org> wrote: > > You're assuming the cost of always hair pinning traffic on an interface > > is cheaper than issuing a redirect. > > I am saying no such thing. (a single redirect packet is always more > efficient.) I *am* saying ICMP redirects are a mistake that should not be > replicated in IPv6. They are too easy to abuse, which is why they are > almost universally ignored by IPv4 hosts. > I thought we were talking about IPv6 redirects not IPv4 ones. How much do you know about their operation and purposes? > In a *properly* configured network, redirects should not be necessary. > (everything on the local LAN should know what's on the local LAN.) [For > the record, my own networks don't follow that rule. :-) Coworkers throwing > random crap on the wire doesn't help. *sigh* Don't go there.] > > IPv6 has more than enough mistakes glued into it. Redirects are a mess > that does not need to be there. For the purests who insist on making ugly > networks that are trival to subvert, make ICMPv6 redirects *OPTIONAL*, > *REQUIRING* explicit configuration to enable. Without strong > authentication/authorization mechanisms, it'll be the same mess that it is > in IPv4. > Know anything about IPv6 SeND? > --Ricky