RE: Comments on draft-wbeebee-ipv6-cpe-router-01.txt

["Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>]

Ole said: why do you need a global address on the WAN interface because
the CPE router is a router??

RPF (Reverse Path Forwarding) will fail and if RPF fails for a router,
due to security concerns, the router should drop the incoming packet. If
the WAN interface of the CPE Router does not have a global IPV6 address,
how is RPF going to work? RPF needs global IPv6 addresses.

We haven't looked at the problem with a fine tooth and comb but when we
do we will list all cases for what IPv6 routing and data forwarding
breaks down if a routed interface of a router has only a link-local
address.

Hemant 

-----Original Message-----
From: ichiroumakino@gmail.com [mailto:ichiroumakino@gmail.com] On Behalf
Of Ole Troan
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 7:13 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: Stark, Barbara; v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Antonio Querubin
Subject: Re: Comments on draft-wbeebee-ipv6-cpe-router-01.txt

> BTW, we have already replied to Barabara on July 8th that unnumbered 
> model that she proposed by giving global IPv6 addresses to LAN
> interface(s) and only a link-local to WAN interface(s) is fine for the

> CPE Router. See the email exchange below. I was just warning today 
> that for routing functionality, we just need a global IPv6 address on 
> the WAN interface. After all, the CPE Router is a router.

I don't understand your last sentence. why do you need a global address
on the WAN interface because the CPE router is a router??

/ot