>>>>> On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 17:32:03 -0800 (PST),
>>>>> Erik Nordmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> So do we or do we not want to
> 1. specify the per-interface router definition
> 2. specify how RFC 2461 (and 62) behave on a multihomed node
Hmm, I see the discussion about the definition of per-interface router
leads us to the more generic (and difficult) issues: ND/autoconf for a
multihomed node (host).
Although opinions on this may vary, my impression is that the generic
issue is beyond the scope of 2461/2462bis. It would require a large
amount of time for discussion and would require significant changes to
implementations. This does not meet the original purpose of
2461/2462bis.
However, I also think per-interface stateless address
autoconfiguration is relatively trivial and can be consistent with the
current RFC2461 spec (and with 2461bis probably). That is, I think we
can allow a node to receive an RA on a non-advertising interface (per
RFC2461) to configure a global address on the interface without going
into further on the multihome issues.
In any event, I don't have a strong opinion on this. If we can
quickly reach a consensus about the per-interface address
autoconfiguration, I'll revise the rfc2462bis text accordingly.
Otherwise, I'd simply leave the current text as is (it would be a bit
ambiguous as currently is, though).
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
