> Issue description:
>
> RFC 2461 is not clear on whether it is possible for
> a node to act as a router on one or more interfaces
> and a host on other interface(s). The distinction
> between the two functions is not clearly done on
> a per interface basis.
>
> Suggestion: We need to explicitly state that the
> distinction between acting as a host or router
> is configurable for each interface.
>
> The following text is included in section 6.2.1 of the
> current draft:
>
> For each multicast interface:
>
> IsRouter A flag indicating whether routing is enabled on
> this interface. Enabling routing on the interface
> would imply that a router can forward packets
> to or from the interface.
>
> This issue is now resolved
sorry about late comment, but how far would you like to go?
like interface A forwards to B (and vice versa), and C-D, ...
how would you describe?
i'm for simple "router or host" in document, and leave per-interface
"router" as a exercise for reader ("virtual router" concept is not new
so vendors will make such device anyways).
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
