Francis Dupont writes:
> => I don't believe we should specify two different interpretations
> but obviously we have to do the choice between:
> - use interface indexes and make scope IDs not very useful for the
> receiving side
> - use traditional (ie as for unicast) scope IDs and make the sin6_scope_id
> field nearly useless for emission to destinations to a scope larger
> than link-local (the only thing I can see is to check interfaces
> specified by IPV6_MULTICAST_IF are in the right zone)
> I was in favour of the first solution, now I believe the second is better.
It's not useless on emission, since it's not required to do IPV6_MULTICAST_IF.
If you don't do IPV6_MULTICAST_IF, the meaning would
be to send via some interface in the set identified by scope_id.
However, when IPV6_MULTICAST_IF is done, the most you can use it for
is a sanity check and fail the send if you try to send out an interace
not in the given scope.
-Dave
