From owner-freebsd-net Thu Sep 19 22:49: 2 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 7103A37B401 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:49:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (drugs.dv.isc.org [130.155.191.236]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1577A43E42 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:49:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marka@drugs.dv.isc.org) Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g8K5mrB5067818; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 15:48:54 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from marka@drugs.dv.isc.org) Message-Id: <200209200548.g8K5mrB5067818@drugs.dv.isc.org> To: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= Cc: Juan Francisco Rodriguez Hervella , Lista , "(Lista) bind9-users@isc.org" From: Mark.Andrews@isc.org Subject: Re: RES_INSECURE and CHECK_SRVR_ADDR in resolver functions (IPv6 anycast response problem) In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 20 Sep 2002 14:00:46 +0900." Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 15:48:53 +1000 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 > >>>>> On Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:59:54 +1000, > >>>>> Mark_Andrews@isc.org said: > > > IPv6 anycast addresses are a joke as they are currently > > defined. Don't bother with them until there behaviour > > gets redefined by the IETF. > > (I'm just asking,) what is the "joke" part of the current definition? > The restriction that an anycast address must not be used as a packet's > source address? Yes, and I know why the restriction is in RFC 1884 and it is a reasonable restriction. A client application shouldn't have to care if a packet is sent to a anycast address and the reply should appear to come from the anycast address from the point of view of the application. Until anycast addresses meet the above they will be a joke. With multicast and broadcast you know in advance that you will get return a traffic from a different address. Anycast addresses appear to the client application as unicast addresses. They should behave like unicast addresses for the client application. Server applications may need additional smarts to cope with anycast addresses. But really the IP stack should deal with 99% of this. Mark > > JINMEI, Tatuya > Communication Platform Lab. > Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. > jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp -- Mark Andrews, Internet Software Consortium 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark.Andrews@isc.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message