At 10:53 PM -0400 6/26/00, Jim Bound wrote:
>Where in ND? I have looked at that and the Addr Arch spec.
ND provides a way to tell the hosts not to assume that all nodes
within the same subnet prefix are on the same link, and therefore
to initially use the router to reach another host with the same
subnet prefix rather than doing a neighbor solicitation. The
purpose of that capability is to support subnets than span more
than one link (both for globally-unique and site-local subnets).
>If a global prefix can be advertrised on multiple links and as we have
>already stated in the IPng WG the link-local adddresses may not be
>globally unique? We have just said IPv6 cannot support Global
>Addresses.
What the heck are you talking about? Of course IPv6 can support
Global Addresses -- that's what all of deployed IPv6 today is using,
and they do seem to work.
If you are concerned about routing advertisement messages carrying
information about subnets that span multiple links, they still go
hop-by-hop, one link at a time, so non-globally-unique link-local
addresses can be used to carry them from router to router. The trick
to making multi-link subnets work is not to advertise the subnet prefix
among the routers within the subnet, but rather to advertise individual
node addresses (i.e., "host routes") for all nodes within the subnet.
Those then get aggregated into a subnet route for advertisement across
links that are *not* part of the multi-link subnet.
> This means Ipv6 is a lie?????
That's quite a leap. We've never claimed that multi-link subnet are a
feature of IPv6, so where is the lie? Perhaps if anyone ever gets around
to designing the rest of the necessary pieces and implements them,
we'll discover some unexpected, fatal flaw. Until then, we won't know
absolutely for sure. But no one's lying about any of this.
>I suggest strongly any who believe this is possible defend it, show us
>in the specs where this is permitted, and I believe very important.
Why do you believe it is "very important"? If it's very important to
support multi-link subnets, why have you not brought this up years ago,
and why has no one else complained about their absence?
(By the way, you'll see that multi-link subnets is one of the topics in
the draft new ipngwg charter that Bob posted on Friday, in the category
of stuff that we would welcome contributions on.)
>This means we need special routing code for global addresses?
No. Regular old routing code works fine for global addresses.
>I can go on and on..........
I know.
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
