> Right. In addition, the SEND WG had an issue about this as well, when > they debated the semantics of prefixes in router certificates. (They > decided to stick with the IPv6 RA semantics. That is, SEND hopes > someone else, maybe multi6, will make it clearer what the rules are.) > > I have also seen the RFC 3484 rules, and I agree with others that > they are somewhat vague. In any case, multi6 is already discussing > this so eventually there will be a spec that will guide us. However, > in any case when there are multiple routers with different prefixes > on the same link, currently implemented IPv6 hosts may make the > wrong decision. Certainly at least those nodes that predate RFC 3484.
=> I think even the nodes that implement 3484 may make the wrong decision. The text that Alper sent is not "standards text" and I suspect there are implementations (e.g. BSD) that don't follow this. > > But I have a question about the NEMO case. I had assumed that mobile > routers move around and attach their egress interface to various > place in the internet. And that their ingress interface serves > a number of hosts, unaware of the movements. I don't see the > default router selection as an issue in this scenario, as the > hosts will stick to the same mobile router all the time, and > the mobile router acts like a host on its egress interface. So > if the visited link works for hosts, it should work for mobile > routers. => The problem is when you have 2 MRs, each advertising a different prefix (i.e. different home prefix). Hesham > > But perhaps you are considering a situation where the ingress > interface of two mobile routers may be shared, or that a mobile > router's ingress interface may suddenly appear on some stationary > network. If we allow this, there could be problems. Do we really > need it? > > --Jari > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
