Hi Alex, I agree completely with Erik here, and heard much the same from others present at the meeting. --Brian > From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Alex, > > I really really don't see the need for what the draft > calls "symmetric bi-directional tunnels". > > While such constructs might be used in the traffic > engineering context the TE context comes with a control > protocol (MPLS) for setting up the explicit paths and > recovering from failure. Getting MPLS to control > IPv6-in-IPv6 tunnels would be a huge exercise of very > questionable value. > > Thus my personal opinion is that the draft should only > specify "regular" bi-directional tunnels. > > Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
