Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 21:35:19 +0900 From: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@freebsd.org> To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Li, Qing" <qing.li@bluecoat.com> Subject: Re: issue with route Message-ID: <yge4qch9bso.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> In-Reply-To: <429EEE8C.86657ED1@freebsd.org> References: <48D44BB27BDE3840BDF18E59CB169A5C010AF780@bcs-mail3.internal.cacheflow.com> <429EEE8C.86657ED1@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Hi,
>>>>> On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 13:33:32 +0200
>>>>> Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> said:
> I think this behavior is probably not intended and should be treated
> as a bug. I did a quick patch in sys/net/route.c
> (it's just as easy in sbin/route.c).
andre> Unless this causes or supposed to cause some kind of automagic
andre> IPv4 in IPv6 encapsulation? Can you check out if this is not
andre> the case (RFC references, KAME folks)?
I believe it is not intended.
IIRC, USAGI has automatic tunnel. So, such route is valid on Linux,
and it means IPv4 over IPv6 tunnel.
KAME doesn't have such feature.
Sincerely,
--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
ume@mahoroba.org ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?yge4qch9bso.wl%ume>