RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6

Ok, plesse see me prior email.

Martin

--On Mittwoch, Januar 16, 2002 23:46:40 +0530 Vijayabhaskar A K 
<vijayak@india.hp.com> wrote:

> We can use this for forwarding from the network which
> don't have any router advertisement, but has a node
> in the network, attached to the another network and has
> ip-forwarding enabled.
> ~vijay
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
>> Martin Stiemerling
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 5:56 PM
>> To: vijayak@india.hp.com; dhcwg@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6
>>
>>
>> >> In the case of no on-link router, no routes are required!
>> >
>> > In the absence of an on-link IPv6 router, hosts might use configured
>> > tunnels to reach other IPv6 networks. Such routes can be sent in
>> > static-route option.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, this might be useful, but doesn't sound directly like
>>
> static routes,
>> but more than transistioning mechanismen (IPv6 over IPv4
>> tunnel). There are
>> two DSTM options in the draft, but they may not be sufficient
>> for this
>> purpose.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dhcwg mailing list
>> dhcwg@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg