Re: [Anima] Is this how BRSKI/IPIP works?

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
    >> Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote: > OK, I'm
    >> getting there. More in line:
    >> 
    >> >> 1) Registrar accepts any Lx1 as local.  There is no precedent in v6
    >> >> APIs to open such a socket, but this actually supported on many >>
    >> platforms.  It's used for nasty stuff like transparent application >>
    >> layer proxies, forced HTTP proxying, and the like.
    >> 
    >> > I think there's a more subtle way to look at it. When the registrar
    >> > receives a protocol 41 packet from a new ACP address, it
    >> conceptually > synthesises a new virtual interface and assigns Lx1 as
    >> its link local > address. On that interface, things would look
    >> normal. Thus RFC2473:
    >> 
    >> I can buy this.  It argues that the Proxy should send a gratuitous
    >> packet to the Registrar to prime that virtual interface.  An ICMP echo
    >> request perhaps.

    > Or a GRASP M_NOOP, designed for such purposes!

I think that's also reasonable.  
 
    >> How can we document this well?

    > I think it has to be spelled out almost at the pseudocode level. We had
    > to spell out the encap/decap behaviour for 6to4 in some detail, and
    > that was just about the only bit of 6to4 that never created trouble
    > ;-). There are various encap/decap specs of that kind, and the NAT64
    > stuff also goes into horrible detail...

okay.  Are you suggesting the 6to4 document should be looked at for style?

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [ 
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [ 
]     [e-mail]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [