Re: NOTE: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-v6ops-mech-v2-01.txt

[JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>]

>>>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:03:48 +0100 (CET), 
>>>>> Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com> said:

>> Note: the document should be clearer that configured tunnels are typically 
>> point-to-point, and then you typically don't even need the link-local 
>> addresses, so this becomes practically rather irrelevant..

> There are some cases when link-locals would be required. For instance,
> for a host-router tunnel it might make sense for the router to send router
> advertisements and those must be sourced with link-local addresses.

> For a router-router tunnel I think the link-locals can be omitted, unless they
> are used as next-hops across the tunnel.

I think link-locals are often "used", particularly when we run an IGP
(RIPng, OSPFv3, or ISIS) across the tunnel.  (But this is so obvious
that I'm not sure if this discussion really missed this point in the
first place...)

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp