[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

(usagi-users 00768) Re: source routing honored by hosts?

To: ipng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, usagi-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: (usagi-users 00768) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2001 23:09:56 +0900
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109091459540.25161-100000@netcore.fi>
List-subscribe: <mailto:usagi-users-ctl@linux-ipv6.org?body=subscribe>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109011445490.19412-100000@netcore.fi> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109091459540.25161-100000@netcore.fi>
Reply-to: usagi-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: "Hideaki YOSHIFUJI" <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

In article <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109091459540.25161-100000@xxxxxxxxxx> (at Sun, 9 Sep 2001 15:55:21 +0300 (EEST)), Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx> says:

> There has not been an "official" statement on ipng IETF list on this, but
> the general consensus seems to be that hosts should not forward
> source-routed frames, at least by default.

Who did say that it should be disabled by default?
Consensus seems to be "hosts are expected to forward source-routed 
frames by default."

...or, do I misunderstand something?

We need the conclusion of this discussion...

--
yoshfuji

Follow-Ups:
- (usagi-users 00769) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
  - From: Pekka Savola

References:
- (usagi-users 00751) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
  - From: Pekka Savola
- (usagi-users 00767) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
  - From: Pekka Savola

Prev by Date: (usagi-users 00767) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
Next by Date: (usagi-users 00769) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
Previous by thread: (usagi-users 00767) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
Next by thread: (usagi-users 00769) Re: source routing honored by hosts?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread