> From: "Richard Draves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As kre points out I think the draft answers your questions, Right, I commented without reading the draft properly :-) > but I want to followup on one point that should probably be > clarified in the draft. When you say "currently unreachable (no > entry in neighbor cache)" it sounds like you might have a > misunderstanding. If the host has no information about the router's > reachability then the host should assume the router is reachable. Hmm.... the IPv6 neighbor discovery says that after probes fail, entry should be removed, see RFC-2461 7.3.3 Upon entering the PROBE state, a node sends a unicast Neighbor Solicitation message to the neighbor using the cached link-layer address..... ..... If no response is received after waiting RetransTimer milliseconds after sending the MAX_UNICAST_SOLICIT solicitations, retransmissions cease and the entry SHOULD be deleted. As to 3.4 in internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipv6-router-selection-02.txt, it talks only about routers X and Y. Playing nasty, I imagine situation where I have routers X, Y and Z (with prefix lengths X > Y > Z) and destination matching all of them. Now, if only Z is currently reachable, I should probably probe both X and Y using some logic... -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
