> I'm doing my best to follow this thread, but one item in your note > to Rich Draves has me confused: > > Keith Moore wrote: > > furthermore if you have multiple prefixes on a net, some of which > > are trusted and some which are not, then you have to configure > > each of those apps to tell them to use the trusted prefix. > > Can you say more about how this could occur in deployment > scenarios? Prefixes come from router advertisements, stateful > delegations (e.g., DHCPv6), or manual config - right? Are you > saying that applications need to be configured in order to know > which prefixes are legitimate and which are rogues?
it is being claimed that 'servers' will know which sources of traffic are trustworthy based on source address. (yes, that's fairly dodgy , but a lot of sites do it for internal servers, so let's assume it's valid for the sake of argument) well, if you have multiple prefixes on the net, and some of those prefixes are trusted and some are not, then the apps (I don't like to say 'clients' because not all apps are client/server) have to know to use the trusted prefixes in order that the servers will trust them. this remains the case regardless of whether the trusted prefix is an SL prefix or not. but having SL prefixes assumed to be trustworthy by apps is one of the advantages being claimed for SL. Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
