Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Misconceptions, was: IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?
From: Mark Andrews <marka () isc org>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 12:12:43 +1100


In message <68424.1325204802 () turing-police cc vt edu>, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu writes:
On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 07:30:16 +0900, Masataka Ohta said:
IGP is the way for routers advertise their existence,
though, in this simplest case, an incomplete proxy of
relying on a default router works correctly.

Which is sufficient for 99.8% of hosts out there.

Beyond that, if there are multiple routers, having a default
router and relying

Yes yes we know, and we've understood this for a quarter century or so.  My
disagreement is that even though 99.8% of machines *don't* have multiple
routers, you seem to be pedantically insisting that some sort of IGP is
mandatory for *all* end hosts, even though only 0.2% or so will actually see
any benefit at all.

Well I'd like to be able to plug in the cable router and the DSL
router at home and have it all just work.  Just because it is 0.2%
today doesn't mean that it will be 0.2% in the future.  As home
users get more and more dependent on the internet working having
diverse, independent network connectivity will become more and more
important.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka () isc org


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault