[c-nsp] Specification of RA that responds to RS (applied?RA?suppress I/F)

[David Freedman]

>Okay, I have read Cisco's reasoning[1], although I cannot still see why
>it's necessary, but I'm not in the ISP/CPE business so my brain is not
>currently wired for that sort of thinking...I would have expected IGP on
>the next-hop to the customer router to have advertised the route.

Just that if the default is injected into another routing protocol, it may
happen with the true next-hop preserved (there are good reasons for doing
this in *limited* ISP scenarios), rather than violate the configured routing
policy and change the next hop if it were to be link local, the better idea
(as cisco have taken) is just to cave in to the old whinging folk and give
HSRP6 some global capability.

It is also worth pointing out that under the existing (link local) model,
unless you don't configure a (normal) global address on the gateway
interface at all, your traceroute/rDNS should not be an issue.

Dave.


-- 

David Freedman
Claranet 
http://www.clara.net