On Jul 4, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Karl Auer wrote: > On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 13:30 +0200, Mark Townsley wrote: >> 6rd makes use of the v6 subnet router anycast >> [...] >> Also, at the last IETF meeting the DHC WG took on an effort to >> describe the use of subnet router anycast here: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-guo-softwire-6rd-ipv6-config-02 > > On an admittedly rapid read through those texts (RFC3315, RFC5969, the > above draft) all references to subnet router anycast addresses were > inside "SHOULD" clauses. Which implies that there are alternative > methods of achieving those aims?
In this case, the alternative is to simply not have the troubleshooting feature. - Mark > > One alternative would be to make the subnet router anycast address > well-known rather than reserved. Then it could be used in environments > that need it, and would not interfere in environments that do not. > > 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 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > [email protected] > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
