Date:Thu, 16 May 2002 17:28:41 +0900
From:Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| this is totally normal DNS relay server behavior. they look at
| ID field of DNS packet, and relays response to the original querier.
>> On a given IPv6 Interface on a router, I understand that it is allowed
>> to configure a global unicast address with an Interface_ID
>> which is *different* from the Interface_ID of the Link Local Address.
>>
>> - is this something that should be discouraged
>> or instead
>> - can this be cons
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> On a given IPv6 Interface on a router, I understand that it is allowed
> to configure a global unicast address with an Interface_ID
> which is *different* from the Interface_ID of the Link Local Address.
>
> - is this something that should be discouraged
> or instead
> -
In your previous mail you wrote:
On a given IPv6 Interface on a router, I understand that it is allowed
to configure a global unicast address with an Interface_ID
which is *different* from the Interface_ID of the Link Local Address.
- is this something that should be discouraged
On Thu, 16 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On a given IPv6 Interface on a router, I understand that it is allowed
> to configure a global unicast address with an Interface_ID
> which is *different* from the Interface_ID of the Link Local Address.
>
> - is this something that should be discour
Hello all,
Could anyone advice on the following ?
On a given IPv6 Interface on a router, I understand that it is allowed
to configure a global unicast address with an Interface_ID
which is *different* from the Interface_ID of the Link Local Address.
- is this something that should be discouraged
>To accomplish that, either the relay needs to retain state
>(it would be close enough to a specialised NAT server) or the
>protocol needs to include enough information so the relay can
>tell from the reply where the reply needs to be sent (which
>makes the whole protocol close enough to isomorphi
