"Alan E. Beard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|As I understand the above text, routers are intended to discard traffic
|(as distinguished from routing protocol prefix propagation) with
|destination addresses in the range of FC00::/7 unless there exists in the
|routing table a prefix of the form FC00:*:*/48 or FD00:*:*/48 where the
|entire prefix matches the destination address of the subject packets.
That seems to be what you are suggesting, and it is totally unacceptable.
|This would imply that forwarding would be based on routing table longest
|match, with any packet matching FC00::/8 or FD00::/8 discarded, but, for
|example, traffic matching routing table entry FC00:DEAD:BEEF/48 forwarded.
|
|If my interpretation thus far is accurate, the issue postulated by Dan
|does not exist: as long as a specific route to the destination (perhaps,
|to any matching prefix with a length greater than /8) exists in the
|routing table, matching traffic will be forwarded.
There is a huge difference between requiring a /48 and allowing anything
greater than /8. The former cripples the address space for many purposes
while the latter means that you can bypass the black hole with 2 or 4
route additions. You can't have it both ways.
Dan Lanciani
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
