you know what I love? address selection rules, or rather the fact that we have to have them in this new ip protocol :(
bugs and code problems and operational headaches and filters and ... :( On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Jack Bates <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/27/2012 11:20 AM, Chris Adams wrote: >> >> Once upon a time, Jack Bates<[email protected]> said: >>> >>> fe80::/65 discard >>> fe80:0:0:0:8000::/65 discard >>> >>> More specifics rule out over connected any day. >> >> That would also kill any legitimate link-local traffic though. > > > Perhaps. I'm actually curious on that, as the rules for routing to > link-local are very specialized. It might flag on uRPF for local traffic, > but that can be overcome with a fail filter. Sending out from the RE could > likely ignore the route, as it has to send to specific interfaces. Receiving > on interfaces that don't have uRPF should still work as well. > > It's a theory and would have to be tested. > > Jack >
