At 12:09 PM +0200 3/16/01, Markku Savela wrote:
>The address obviously belongs to my host, there cannot be any other
>host having such address. To drop it, I have to do the additional
>check for x=0 specially. Could also just leave the test out, and treat
>is as legal packet.
To recognize your own addresses, you should be doing a full 128-bit
compare, not examining individual fields. Just put all of your
own addresses in your routing table, with a prefix length of 128
bits and a "self" indicator, and let normal longest-match lookup
do its thing. Embedding unnecessary knowledge of address structure
or address allocation policy in your code is Bad Practice.
>The choice in here fixes possible future uses of those bits.
Yes, if you start making assumptions about address formats or contents
beyond what the specifications require, and if your implementation gets
widely deployed, that may well become a major inhibitor to future
evolution of the protocol. Please don't do that.
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
