In line. On 10/21/14, 10:36 AM, lizho.jin@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > Hi Joel, see inline below, thanks. > > Lizhong > > >> 2014.10.21，PM9:30，Joel M. Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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