On 12/07/2017 12:47, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote: > > But the third locator sent by the Registrar indicates a meaningless > > link-local address, because it could come from many hops away. At first > > I thought this was a confusion with the previous (proxy-to-pledge) > > case, where all addresses must be link-local. But no: this text is just > > confused, I think: > > This LL address is the Lr from my email of three minutes ago: > > mcr> Instead, I have two suggestions, not entirely mutually exclusive: > mcr> 1) the Registrar says, "I accept IPIP on Address Ar, use Lr for > mcr> connections" > mcr> 2) we make Lr = well known Link-Local anycast address > > I included Lr in the protocol, even if we might decide that we want to make > it well-known.
As I just said, I don't understand why this address is even needed. Brian _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
