Margaret,
>> Michel Py wrote:
>> I fail to see what the problem is if the node is a router
>> that has a global on one interface and a site-local one
>> on another interface.
> Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> If you have a site-border router in two sites, and the
> hosts in one of the sites _only_ have site-local addresses,
> then you don't need a router at all, as it will never
> forward any packets. The hosts in the site that only has
> site-local addresses will not be able to send any packets
> outside the site, and no hosts from outside the site will
> be able to send any packets to them.
Which is precisely what I want, that would be Router A.
However, I was referring to a router that has a global on one interface
and a site-local one on another interface, such as Router B below, and
both interfaces are part of the same site. Again, what is the problem
with this?
<-------------------- Global Addresses ----------------><-- SL addr -->
+-----+
| ISP | :
+--+--+ :
! :
+--+---------+ +----------+ +----------+ +----------+
| Router A : +--+ Firewall +--+--+ Firewall +--+--+ Router B +---+
+------------+ +----------+ | +----------+ | +----------+ |
: | | |
: +---+--+ +--+---+ +----+----+
: | DFZ | | Host | | Control |
: | Host | +------+ | Device |
: +------+ +---------+
---Site -->:<-------------------------- Site ------------------------->
:
Michel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
