Linux and ULA support and default route

[Holger Zuleger]

On 14.10.2016 15:20, sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:
>> At the end, the whole behavior is because some host have problems in
>> handling situations where they have an IPv6 address configured and now
>> internet connectivity. But the solution to this requires that the host
>> is able to understand and work with RIO options, which seams to be "at
>> the time" not generally the case.
>>
>> Do we replace one evil by another?
> 
> I like Tore's solution of using ULA for local communication even when
> the external link is down.
That's not the question. The question is: Should a router stop
advertising a default route if the (or better say "his") upstream link
is down.

 Holger


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4160 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20161014/84803833/attachment.bin