[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Another requirement [Re: New (-02) version of IPv6 CPE Router draft is available for review]
- To: Antonio Querubin <tony@lava.net>, "Hemant Singh \(shemant\)" <shemant@cisco.com>
- Subject: RE: Another requirement [Re: New (-02) version of IPv6 CPE Router draft is available for review]
- From: Francois-Xavier Le Bail <fx.lebail@yahoo.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 07:55:53 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=yYeu28s+6Mlm22ICnT21j9h6SswKRwlBQuYbUYOqh4lcIgp9xaWrsCSihwCLJgXkJhRE1DrMvPUlYWx92Vd0pOlUkMESfhW0wQXSaOxu/6hwua3qgDYzkSo+844dsdvdMoYYnmmazp17332BIXACxZFG9U6NYH+GQsoTjVgCDCc=;
--- On Tue, 8/5/08, Hemant Singh (shemant) <shemant@cisco.com> wrote:
> >Or setup option ?
> >Or managed by the ISP ?
>
> We see no reason why the null route setup cannot be
> automated. If folks
> insist to support a manual configuration for this feature,
> then we may
> consider that option too.
These questions where about the choice to reply with an ICMPv6
unreachable or just silently discard the packet.
Francois-Xavier