> On Mon, 02 Jul 2001 10:15:21 -0700,
> "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> I don't have any objection to changing the default interface to a
>> non-loopback one, *if the default is ever defined*. I'm arguing that
>> it would be safe *not to specify the default interface by def
> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 15:27:26 +0900
> From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?=
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:28:54 -0700,
> > "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >> That is, if we do not have any default
> 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.
> 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
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:28:54 -0700
> "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
oberman> I think the basic idea in the RFC may be reasonable. It only breaks
oberman> when the link selected is loopback. Had the stack tried to connect to
oberman> a physical link, this would have worked as
> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:00:18 +0900
> From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?=
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:12:28 +0900 (JST),
> > Hajimu UMEMOTO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> oberman> I agree, but I have made no
Thanks so much for your prompt attention.
I have made the change to rc.conf and I now get an expected "connect:
No route to host" message. I will not be connected to network running
IPv6 until next week, but I will check normal IPv6 operation at that
time.
Thanks again!
R. Kevin Oberman, Networ
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:12:28 +0900 (JST),
> Hajimu UMEMOTO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
oberman> I agree, but I have made no deliberate changes. I just install FreeBSD
oberman> with ipv6_enable="YES" in rc.config.
oberman> Internet6:
oberman> DestinationGatewayFlags
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:19:04 -0700
> "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
oberman> I agree, but I have made no deliberate changes. I just install FreeBSD
oberman> with ipv6_enable="YES" in rc.config.
oberman> Internet6:
oberman> DestinationGatewayFlags Neti
> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 04:12:42 +0900 (JST)
> From: Hajimu UMEMOTO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:52:37 -0700
> > "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> oberman> I run IPv6 on my laptop and my office system. As long as I have an
> ob
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:52:37 -0700
> "Kevin Oberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
oberman> I run IPv6 on my laptop and my office system. As long as I have an
oberman> IPv6 path between the systems, everything is fine. But, if there is no
oberman> IPv6 link, packets to ANY IPv6 address simp
I run IPv6 on my laptop and my office system. As long as I have an
IPv6 path between the systems, everything is fine. But, if there is no
IPv6 link, packets to ANY IPv6 address simply go to loopback!
> traceroute6 pak
traceroute6 to pak.es.net (2001:400:0:11:200:f8ff:fe22:955) from fe80::1, 30 hop
12 matches
Mail list logo
