[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: RIPng
- From: [email protected] (Dimitry Haskin)
- Date: Fri, 9 Aug 96 10:32:47 EDT
> > Whether or not the endpoints of a tunnel need their own link-local addresses
> > is an open issue. I don't think RIPng should require that, since RIP
> > classically has operated fine over unnumbered p-to-p links.
> In addition, I don't think RIPng should require link-local addresses
> even over multicast network.
Well.. this would be fundamental deviation from the ND requirements.
> If RIPng doesn't use link-local addresses as the source address,
> routed can determine the interface where RIPng comes by checking its
> source address with address of interface.
The source address IS the address of the interface where RIPng comes from.
> Currently, routed require special interface to determine the
> interface (ask ND, or extented recvfrom()).
It sounds that routed is fundamentally broken.
> Atsushi Onoe, WIDE Project