 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
my suggestion is to leave it SHOULD.you didnt justify why. makes no sense on an unprotected network.i did. you did not quote my previous line.agree completely. if you allow enemy to be on-link you are dead. my suggestion is to leave it SHOULD.this is just like physical security; if you allow people to enter computer room, security mechanisms are pertty moot as bad guys can use sledge hammer to break the computer.
it still does not make sense. even the IETF WLAN network is unprotected. somebody could easily screw up your network interface by replying to your DAD NS solicitation. you are just making it simple for somebody to disable your interface by leaving it as SHOULD. Vijay -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------