> Regarding rfc2461bis, if we allow the mixed behavior, we also need to > clarify (at least) some other things that include: > > - whether a mixed node can receive an RA on a "host" interface to > configure a default router list
Why? Per RFC 2461 the per router list is per interface. There is an issue for the implementations (probably all implementations) which have a per-node default router list, but from the perspective of the RFC 2461 specification it has already punted on all aspects of multi-interfaced hosts. > So, (if we concentrate on the "simple" cases), I think we should > emphasize that even if an interface is not an advertising interface > the node still acts as a router on that interface (e.g., it can > forward from/to that interface, exchange routing information on that > interface, etc) Whether or not we concentrate on the "simple" case, I think it makes sense to state that a non-advertising interface is still one that behaves as a router e.g. the R-bit in the NA should be set since another router might redirect hosts to use the router that doesn't advertise itself. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
