On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 16:34 +0900, Randy Bush wrote: > could you explain to my why i would want to reach any random router on a > lan? some mey go to florida, others to shinjuku, and one goes to hell > in a handbasket.
heh :-) Randy, are we actually on the same page? I like the idea of on-link anycast in general, but do not see why we should reserve any addresses for it. I'm therefore in favour of deprecating both the subnet router anycast address and the subnet anycast addresses. Which is (I think) all your draft is advocating...? Regards, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer ([email protected]) +61-2-64957160 (h) http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob) GPG fingerprint: DA41 51B1 1481 16E1 F7E2 B2E9 3007 14ED 5736 F687 Old fingerprint: B386 7819 B227 2961 8301 C5A9 2EBC 754B CD97 0156
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
