On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 04:57:43PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> What, we have to be nice to the users now? ;)
> 
> Fair enough, I'll add support for both types of channels. Should it be
> possible to connect the same instance to both an ipv6 and and ipv6_sadr
> channel type, or is it OK to enforce that there's only one of those
> active?

It is OK to enforce that there is only one of those active.
How non-SADR-aware Babel should handle SADR routes? Is it
mandatory sub-TLV, so they are ignored; or optional sub-TLV,
so they are handled as regular routes?

-- 
Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo

Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santi...@crfreenet.org)
OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net)
"To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."

Reply via email to