Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 16:24:00 -0600
From: Matt Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| I still don't see it. That an argument against unnumbered links, but
| it still doesn't imply any topological relation between the addresses
| of the endpoints. Kernel tables and routing protocols are both able
| to cope with a p-p link from A::X to B::Y. But, as I said, there may
| be operational concerns of which I am innocent.
Matt - this is way off the topic of the original question now, but if I'm
the end you're identifying as B::Y, and the p2p link is my only network
connection, from where do I get B ??
That is, consider the p2p link being a standalone workstation (PC if you
like...) with a ppp dialup to some provider. It gets an address when
it connects, and that address comes from the provider's address block.
So, the p2p link will be numbered out of the A subnet space. What length
prefixes are applied (anything from /128 down I guess) is what has been
being discussed.
kre
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
