On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 05:19:27PM -0800, Teco Boot wrote: > Op 6 nov. 2013, om 15:26 heeft Mark Townsley <[email protected]> het volgende > geschreven: > > o The routing protocol or mechanism includes a destination prefix, > > which may be a default route (::/0) or any more specific prefix up > > to and including a host route (/128). > > For homenets and having ingress filtering as BCP, I think ::/0 routes > with ::/0 source prefixes shall not be used. Also, for homenets I do > not see a use case for non-::0 destination prefixes with non-::/0 > source prefixes.
The NTT video service mentioned several times (forgot the name) is a good example of non-::0 dst with non-::0 src. Admittedly, you could drop the source information without too much loss there, but I'm still hopeful that we can somehow feed that information up into the host to improve source address selection. That use case also presents a nice demo of the non-match behaviour because there will be no (dst ::0 src <videoprefix>) route, yielding an automatÑ–c unreachable should a host try to go on the internet with its video address. -David _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
