Subject: Re: Use longest-matching prefix to the next hop

From: arifumi <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 03:55:10 +0900

Hi,

> I suggest the same to the authors of
> draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-sol-00.txt. Could you please first describe
> what is the problem with SAS as specified in RFC 3484. 
> 
> Hemant

sorry for the looong delay,

As stated in this document section 1,

    Today, the RFC 3484 mechanism is widely implemented in major OSs.
    However, many people, including us, have found that in many sites the
    default address-selection rules are not appropriate for the network
    structure.  PS [I-D.ietf-v6ops-addr-select-ps] lists problematic
    cases that resulted from incorrect address selection.

PS document describes the problems related to RFC 3484 default address 
selection.

Thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:02:05 -0400

Arifumi san,

No problem with the delay. I will go thru this doc and understand the
problems you have found and see what we could do here.

Thanks.

Hemant

-----Original Message-----
From: arifumi [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 2:55 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Use longest-matching prefix to the next hop

Hi,

> draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-sol-00.txt. Could you please first 
> describe what is the problem with SAS as specified in RFC 3484.
> 
> Hemant

    However, many people, including us, have found that in many sites
the

Thanks.