In line.
On 10/21/14, 10:36 AM, lizho(_dot_)jin(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com wrote:
Hi Joel, see inline below, thanks.
Lizhong
2014.10.21，PM9:30，Joel M. Halpern <jmh(_at_)joelhalpern(_dot_)com> wrote ：
If the process for this draft is to use the top address that can be
reached in the routing table, then there is a significant
probability that the original source address, which is always at
the top of the list, will be used. As such, the intended problem
will not be solved.
[Lizhong] let me give an example to explain: the source address A is
firstly added to the stack, then a second routable address B for
replying AS is also added. The reply node will not use address A
since it's not routable, then it will use address B. So it will work
and I don't see the problem.
The whole point of this relay mechanism, as I understand it, is to cope
with the case when the responder X can not actually reach the source A.
Now suppose that the packet arrives at X with the Address stack A, B,
... X examines the stack. The domain of A was numbered using net 10.
The domain of X is numbered using net 10. A's address is probably
routable in X's routing table. The problem is, that routing will not
get to A. X examines the stack, determines that A is "routable", and
sends the packet. This fails to meet the goal.
Yours,
Joel