No one has provided an opinion on this...if the list is still silent,
I'll leave the current text as is, as proposed below.
If anyone of you strongly want something explicit on this in
rfc2462bis, please speak up (with proposed text if possible).
Thanks,
J
> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 17:32:03 -0800 (PST),
> Erik Nordmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> So do we or do we not want to
> 1. specify the per-interface router definition
> 2. specify how RFC 2461 (and 62) behave on a multihomed node
Hmm, I see the discussion about the definition of per-inter
> On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:50:44 +0200,
> Jari Arkko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> JINMEI Tatuya wrote:
>> The autoconfiguration process specified in this document applies only
>> to hosts and not routers. Since host autoconfiguration uses
>> information advertised by routers, routers will n
> JINMEI Tatuya wrote:
>
> >The autoconfiguration process specified in this document
> applies only
> >to hosts and not routers. Since host autoconfiguration uses
> >information advertised by routers, routers will need to
> be configured
> >by some other means. However, it is exp
JINMEI Tatuya wrote:
The autoconfiguration process specified in this document applies only
to hosts and not routers. Since host autoconfiguration uses
information advertised by routers, routers will need to be configured
by some other means. However, it is expected that routers will
> +router - a node that forwards IPv6 packets not explicitly
> + addressed to itself. [See Note below].
> +...
> +Note: it is possible, though unusual, for a device with multiple
> +interfaces to be configured to forward non-self-destined packets
> +arrivi
Erik Nordmark wrote:
So do we or do we not want to
1. specify the per-interface router definition
2. specify how RFC 2461 (and 62) behave on a multihomed node
Well, from RFC 2460 we have:
+router - a node that forwards IPv6 packets not explicitly
+ addressed to itself.
> Additionally, adopting this definition also opens up the possibility
> of a "half-host, half-router" node, like:
>
> --(I1)Node(I2)---
>(I3)
> |
> |
>
> where I1 and I2 are "normal" interfaces for which the node is ac
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 7:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [rfc2462bis issue 278] 2462bis for "routers"
There was an issue about how much we should allow a router (not a
host) to use the RFC2462 spec to configure itself. Specifically,
a) if a router can configure a gl
There was an issue about how much we should allow a router (not a
host) to use the RFC2462 spec to configure itself. Specifically,
a) if a router can configure a global address by stateless autoconf
b) if a router can configure a link-local address in a way described
in RFC 2462
10 matches
Mail list logo