From owner-freebsd-net Fri Aug 30 9: 8:55 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69A1F37B400; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cheer.mahoroba.org (flets19-007.kamome.or.jp [218.45.19.7]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AA9943E6A; Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:08:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ume@mahoroba.org) Received: from lyrics.mahoroba.org (IDENT:FjxhADHDWIYtpGiPYzDnfeVPRQP4hQCBiIZWH/QOPjVSIb6Db3mHTndYKG10x9SH@lyrics-wi.mahoroba.org [IPv6:2001:200:301:0:202:2dff:fe41:8630]) (user=ume mech=CRAM-MD5 bits=0) by cheer.mahoroba.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP/inet6 id g7UG8hRr028720 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sat, 31 Aug 2002 01:08:43 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from ume@mahoroba.org) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 01:08:39 +0900 Message-ID: From: Hajimu UMEMOTO To: Nick Sayer Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, brian@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tun's address restrictions, IPv6 and PPP In-Reply-To: <3D6F96C9.6030203@quack.kfu.com> References: <3D6F96C9.6030203@quack.kfu.com> User-Agent: xcite1.38> Wanderlust/2.9.14 (Unchained Melody) SEMI/1.14.4 (Hosorogi) FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.2 (i386--freebsd) MULE/5.0 (=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOC1MWhsoQg==?=) X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.4 - "Hosorogi") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-perl11-milter (http://amavis.org/) Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi, >>>>> On Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:01:13 -0700 >>>>> Nick Sayer said: nsayer> Currently, one cannot change, add or remove addresses to/from tun nsayer> interfaces with ifconfig. This makes sense for IPv4, but I suggest that nsayer> this restriction be lifted for IPv6. Once link-local addresses have been nsayer> negotiated, I don't particlarly see a reason why ordinary router nsayer> solicitation / advertisement couldn't happen over the link outside the nsayer> control of PPP. If we do not do this, then we will have to reimplement nsayer> router solicitation / advertisement in PPP, which seems needless to me. It should be done by PD (Prefix Deligation). In Japan, commercial service of native IPv6 ADSL (PPPoE) will start using PD, soon. Sincerely, -- Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan ume@mahoroba.org ume@bisd.hitachi.co.jp ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org http://www.imasy.org/~ume/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message