Alain, As a first comment, the document is lacking a discussion of the implications of having the BR use its anycast address as the source address for the packets it relays.
Take for example the case of two BRs A and B that configure the same IP anycast address, and a CE router C within the 6rd domain. If BR A forwards packets toward C, but the packets are lost in the SP network, any resulting ICMPs could just as easily flow back through BR B instead of A. Then, if the ICMPs don't contain enough information for translation, BR B has no way to send a translated message back to the original source and a black hole can result. A solution to this would be to have BR's use their unicast address as the source instead of an anycast address. In that case, CE router C simply needs a way to discover the unicast addresses of all BRs in the domain that configure the same anycast address. Such discovery could be via the DHCP option, via DNS resolution of a FQDN, etc. Fred [email protected] ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Durand, Alain Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 1:43 PM To: softwires; DHC WG Cc: David Ward; Ole Troan Subject: [dhcwg] SOFTWIRE working group last call on 6rd All - We'd like to announce the softwire WG LC on the 6rd technology. I've copied both SOFTWIRE and DHC mailing lists and solicit comments from both groups of experts. The draft is here: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-softwire-ipv6-6rd-07.txt Please reply with comments to this thread by 2010.03.08 at 1700 PST Thanks - Alain _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
