Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?yge4qch9bso.wl%ume>