At Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:32:36 +0100,
Jacek Konieczny <jajcus@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Actually it means default route. I can't see why you announce or add
> > statically the route instead of default route.
> This is not the same as default route. Prefix 2000::/3 does not contain
> multicast nor link-local and site-local addresses. Only global unicast
Have you ever seen IPv6 routing table ?? 8)
In routing table, default routes for multicast and link-local address
fe80::/10 :: UA 256 0 0 eth0
ff00::/8 :: UA 256 0 0 eth0
So if a default route exist on routing table, multicast and link-local
packets are not affected. In case of site-local, IMO, it is broken
spec and never work 8)8)8).
Anyway, if you want to mention about filtering invalid packets
with purging default route, I think it should be solved as OPERATIONAL
issues not TECHNICAL issues.
Then I think we should be able to choice using a specific route or
a default route for default unicast routing. Even if the linux kernel
accept default route, you can use a specific route for unicast routing
without default route.
-- Yuji Sekiya