Steve Deering wrote:
> At 9:59 AM -0400 6/27/00, Jim Bound wrote:
> >Also I have no issue of prefixes spanning multiple
> >links unless the following happens.
> >
> >Node A on link1 has fe35::1 as global address.
> >
> >AND
> >
> >Node B on link2 has fe35::1 as global address.
> >
> >Because when the prefix spanned multiple links (link1 and link2) Node A
> >and B have the same link-local address 64bit ID in this case Unicast
> >Aggregate Format for this discussion.
>
> Part of the (not-yet-written-down) work of supporting multi-link subnets is
> making sure that the routers that connect a multi-link subnet ensure that
> DAD messages are relayed/proxied to all links in that subnet (or in some
> other way detect and prevent duplicate interface IDs being used within the
> subnet).
It is a neat idea to have a subnet span different type of links, in particular
when such a solution seem to apply so well in a scenario that is more and
more frequent in home or small office networking environments.
Since DHCPv6 seems to have a problem with this, it would be good to have this
documented ASAP.
With the number of IPv6 documents on continue growth, and with the delay
incurred with writing and posting a new I-D, and since this problem occurs
only with non-unique interface IDs, wouldn't it be more efficient - in terms of
documenting the solution - to add to the specifications that document the
generation of such IDs a section that suggests the solution(s)?
Alex
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
