>>>>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:12:29 +0900,
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>>> from RFC2461 5.1 (conceptual data structures) I feel that the authors
>>> assumed that:
>>> - autoconfigured hosts are at the very edge of the site only
>>> - if we put a host onto a link with more than 2 routers, they will not
>>> automatically be configured, and do something tricky (like running
>>> routing daemon on hosts in receive-only mode).
>>> From which part of RFC2461 do you think so? I don't see such
>> assumptions in the RFC...
> the conceptual data structure says that there's default router list
> and neighbor cache, not routing table.
Destination cache is also contained in the conceptual data
structures. I think it is a host version of routing table.
> RFC2462 configures (routing-
^^^^^^^??? You mean 2461?
> wise) default router only to the host. so, we end up having
> default route on host, no other routes.
Except per-destination routes in Destation Cache.
> if we only have default route,
> it fits best if hosts are on leaf network.
I can't understand the conclusion. I think there is a logical leap...
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
