At Wed, 2 Oct 2002 15:55:51 -0700, Steve Deering wrote: > > Either we're talking about the case where multilink subnets are not > employed (no need to believe in them), in which case my statement > holds.
Right. > Or we are venturing into the oh-so-scary land of multilink subnets, > in which case the routers know (are required to know, in order to > make unicast routing work) that they are extending the span of a > subnet across more than one link, possibly including point-to-point > links, so know which links are part of the same subnet, and can > therefore do subnet-scope boundary enforcement as necessary. > > What am I missing here? A standards track specification for the latter case. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
