In article [ref] (at Thu, 15 Nov 2007 10:11:16 -0800), "Templin, Fred L" [off-list ref] says:

Yoshifuji, 

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 [mailto:yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org] 
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 3:48 AM
To: Templin, Fred L
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; vladislav.yasevich@hp.com; 
yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/01] ipv6: RFC4214 Support (v2.2)

In article 
<39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1029EDC2B@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.bo
eing.com> (at Wed, 14 Nov 2007 22:44:17 -0800), "Templin, 
Fred L" [off-list ref] says:

quoted

From: Fred L. Templin <redacted>

This patch includes support for the Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel
Addressing Protocol (ISATAP) per RFC4214. It uses the SIT
module, and is configured using extensions to the "iproute2"
utility.

The following diffs are specific to the Linux 2.6.24-rc2 kernel
distribution. This message includes the full and patchable 

diff text;

quoted

please use this version to apply patches.

Signed-off-by: Fred L. Templin <redacted>

BTW, how will we handle DNS name (and TTL) and/or multiple PRL entries 
in RFC4214?

I'm doubting if we really need to handle PRL refresh in kernel.

DNS name and PRL refresh are done in a daemon that either exec's
'ip' or issues the device ioctl's directly. When there are multiple default
router IPv4 addresses, the daemon picks one as the primary and writes
it to the kernel. It can then change to a different primary later if it wants
to. Also possible is something like VRRP to allow several routers for
fault tolerance even though there is only a single default router address. 

Why?  All PRLs should be installed in kernel so that standard router 
selection can be used.  For this, I think we should have just one
isatap interface per set of PRLs provideing virtual link,
especially if each of them provides the same prefix.

--yoshfuji