Ian,
> I think that the change that you've proposed would help. But actually the
> worst offender is in section 5:
>
> Port-aware IPv4 entries in the Rules table are installed for all the
> Forwarding Mapping Rules and an IPv4 default route to the MAP BR.
>
>
> What about if this read?:
>
> Port-aware IPv4 entries in the Rules table are installed for all the
> Forwarding Mapping Rules and an IPv4 default route via a tunnel to the MAP
> BR.
that's not quite correct if we model the MAP domain as an NBMA link which all
MAP nodes
are connected to. what about adding similar text to what is in 6rd?
"
When 6rd is enabled, a typical CE router will install a default route
to the BR, a black hole route for the 6rd delegated prefix, and
routes for any LAN side assigned and advertised prefixes. For
example, using a CE IPv4 address of 10.100.100.1, a BR IPv4 address
of 10.0.0.1, an IPv4MaskLen of 8, 2001:db8::/32 as the 6rdPrefix, and
one /64 prefix assigned to a LAN side interface, a typical CE routing
table will look like:
::/0 -> 6rd-virtual-int0 via 2001:db8:0:100:: (default route)
2001:db8::/32 -> 6rd-virtual-int0 (direct connect to 6rd)
2001:db8:6464:100::/56 -> Null0 (delegated prefix null route)
2001:db8:6464:100::/64 -> Ethernet0 (LAN interface)
"
cheers,
Ole
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
