> How about a compromise that makes it clear that
> - isRouter and all other ND configuration and state is per interface
> thus there is nothing in the specification which prevents a node
> being a host on some interfaces and a router on other interfaces.
> The behavior of such nodes on a particular interface is specified
> in this document.
> - the details of how such nodes work across interfaces i.e. how the node
> determines which interfaces forward packets between each other etc
> are out of scope for the document.
i do not like this way. i would like to put:
- a node is either a host or a router. it is a per-host property,
not per-interface property. "advertising interface" has nothing
to do with host/router (as jinmei described)
- (if really necessary) in Appendix, talk about mixed mode node,
and benefits/caveats/pitfalls in doing so. even if we do not write
it up, vendors will do it anyways so my preference is not to mention
mixed mode at all.
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
