On man, august 16, 2010 11:46, Randy Bush wrote: >>> I have no plans to ask Cisco and Juniper about this. I want /127 to >>> continue working, and couldn't care less about subnet anycast for my >>> core routers. >> >> I think you miss my point: they might finally comply with the specs one >> day (if you ask or not, others might) and you will have forgotten about >> this little subtle problem and upgrade your routers and voila your >> network is broken. > > then you will join us supporting the /127 document and it won't be a > problem, will it.
The special case with anycast combined with /127 is such a bad idea that any work on changing it back to the way it worked before (2003 or so was it changed on Linux) will get my support for sure! -- --- ------------------------------ Roger Jorgensen | - ROJO9-RIPE - RJ85P-NORID [email protected] | - The Future is IPv6 ------------------------------------------------------- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
