Subject: Re: question: forcing IPV6 traffic down a IPV6/IPV4 tunnel
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Christian E. Hopps <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/12/2000 14:14:11
> name is easier to manage and simpler. Note that kernel interface
> doesn't have to have a way to pass around interface names, there's
> no reason why the route command given something like
> route add default -int gif0
This is a standard concept in routing even outside of IPv6.
You do not need a next hop address for p2p links. It would be
great if someone stepped up and implemented it in NetBSD, but
so far no-one, including myself, has found the time.