>>>>> On Mon, 02 Jul 2001 15:27:26 +0900,
>>>>> JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>>>> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:28:54 -0700,
>>>>> "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>> That is, if we do not have any default router (hear from RA), we
>>> should regard all IPv6 prefixes as on-link. To implement this trick,
>>> we use the "default interface", and install the default route as an
>>> interface direct route to the interface.
>> I think the basic idea in the RFC may be reasonable. It only breaks
>> when the link selected is loopback. Had the stack tried to connect to
>> a physical link, this would have worked as intended, but loopback will
>> always be the wrong answer if it is the link used.
> Just to make it sure, even if you specify a non-loopback interface as
> the default, you should still (usually) see a long delay before the
> connection attempt by IPv6 fails, because this type of error is not a
> hard error for TCP (like "no route to host"). The delay would be
> about 1 minute. I don't think most users do not tolerate the delay,
^^^^^^should be removed.
sorry for the bad wording.
> especially when the IPv4 connection can be established.
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
