RE: new draft on IPv6 CPE router available for review

[Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>]

On Tue, 1 Jul 2008, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:

> router supporting the link-local only WAN model. Of course, we totally 
> want the first model to be a MUST for the CPE router to support - in 
> this model the WAN interface acquires a global IPv6 address.

What are the downsides of making both models a MUST? I think any router 
should (MUST) be able to source packets from any interface chosen, 
including one that is not the outgoing interface.

This would of course have the implications that some primary host 
implementations with optional routing capability might not comply with 
this right now, but would put pressure on vendors to implement this 
properly.

I know there's been discussions regarding traceroute behaviour as well, 
with the industry standard being that the ICMP TTL-EXCEEDED message being 
sourced from the router IP where it was received, but goes out any 
interface (as per the routing table to the destination).

I just would like to get future IPv6 implementations for routers working 
properly from the start, as most residential CPE vendors seem to not have 
implemented IPv6 support yet, I would like them to do both models as the 
model I'm advocating would have long term benefits for network stability.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se