#5: only one default route?  (there should be multiple, as for MIF WG)

Comment (by alexandru.petrescu@…):

 On 2012-03-28 21:33, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
 > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 00:16, Brian E Carpenter <
 > [email protected]> wrote:
 >
 >> The phrase "more than one default route" on its own makes my head hurt,
 >> given the normal meaning in computer science of the word "default".
 >>
 >> One default route per source prefix in use makes perfect sense, in view
 >> of the need for address pair selection and ingress-filtering avoidance.
 >> (When I think about it, a default route even makes sense for a ULA
 prefix.)
 >
 >
 > No, multiple default routes make sense even when they're not
 > source-specific. For example, they make sense when you have two routers
 and
 > one of them can go down. Remember that a route includes a next-hop, and
 > that RFC 4861 defines a default router list (which is a list of possible
 > next-hops for the default route).

 Fair enough, although if we were starting again there might be a better
 way
 of doing it.

       Brian

 _______________________________________________
 mif mailing list
 [email protected]
 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

-- 
-------------------------------------+---------------------------------
 Reporter:  alexandru.petrescu@…     |       Owner:  Alexandru Petrescu
     Type:  enhancement              |      Status:  new
 Priority:  minor                    |   Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  dhcpv6-route-option      |     Version:
 Severity:  In WG Last Call          |  Resolution:
 Keywords:  multiple default routes  |
-------------------------------------+---------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/mif/trac/ticket/5#comment:9>
mif <http://tools.ietf.org/mif/>

_______________________________________________
mif mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

Reply via email to