>Have I missed something, or why does this have to be done in the routing
>protocol? Can't some more generic, lower level method like NS/ND work
>here?
when there's no linklayer address (ppp/tunnel), the spec do not ask us
to run NS/ND. i guess it is not a good idea to require it,
at this late stage of the standardization.
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- RE: nonexisting destination on p2p link Richard Draves
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Robert Elz
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link itojun
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Robert Elz
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link itojun
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Robert Elz
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Thomas Narten
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p lin... JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Pekka Savola
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Tim Hartrick
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link itojun
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Tim Hartrick
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link itojun
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p lin... Erik Nordmark
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Erik Nordmark
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p lin... JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link Erik Nordmark
- Re: nonexisting destination on p2p link itojun
