Subject: question about draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-02.txt

From: "Ghanwani, Anoop" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:11:32 -0700

In section 9, we have the following text:

  "Note that even with the decision that unicast site-local addresses
   are deprecated, the above procedure still applies to link-local
   addresses.  Thus, if a router receives a packet with a link-local
   destination address that is not one of the router's own link-local
   addresses on the arrival link, the router is expected to try to
   forward the packet to the destination on that link (subject to
   successful determination of the destination's link-layer address via
   the Neighbor Discovery protocol [9]).  The forwarded packet may be
   transmitted back out the arrival interface, or out any other
   interface attached to the same link."

Where would we have a situation where something like this would be
necessary?  If it's addressing a special case, a reference would 
be useful.

Anoop

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉<[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:15:44 +0900

>>>>> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:11:32 -0700, 
>>>>> "Ghanwani, Anoop" <[email-masked]> said:

> necessary?  If it's addressing a special case, a reference would 

One possible scenario I can think of is some special link where hosts
do not want to or cannot perform link-layer address resolution for
their neighbors and simply send all packets to the default router.
The router is supposed to know the link-layer address of the
destination (or know how to get the link-layer address), and forwards
the packet to the destination.  If the destination is a link-local
address, the packet is likely to be sent back to the incoming link.

Of course, I admit this is a very artificial example.  Perhaps others
can provide a more realistic scenario.  In any event, my understanding
of the above description comes from the view that it's better to
provide maximum flexibility unless we have a strong reason not to do
so.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]