> to be clear: i can't make any advice as you are using way too strange
> configuration (trying to make address portable across subnets using
> RIPng, nonstandard netmasks, and more).

I'm not sure what you mean by the bit about making an address portable.
If you're referring to my having L advertise its address so that it
works to disconnect from one place and connect to another, well, isn't
that exactly what routing protocols are for, for dealing with topology
changes?  How does this differ from L having two links to the world,
which just happen to never be up at the same time?  For that matter,
what do you think the non-"strange" way to handle that is?

As for nonstandard netmasks, I'm not sure what's "nonstandard" about
any of the netmasks I'm using, possibly excepting using a /128 on a
broadcast interface; if it makes you happier, I can go to a /127 or
/126 there.  It's not terribly helpful to say something like that
without indicating what a "standard" netmask is, or at least a pointer
to where I can find that information.  If you mean that IPv6 doesn't
support a /112 or /128 netmask in some sense, then I have to ask, why
on earth not??  What does it break, and what should I do instead?

> i don't understand why you cannot following the normal configuration
> practices.

Principally, because I have no idea what you consider "normal
configuration practices".  I've basically just been mapping my v4
knowledge over in what appear to me to be the obvious ways, adjusting
it as I run into the places where v4 and v6 differ.

Depending on what those practices are, once I know, I may have other
reasons for not following them, but I certainly can't explain those
reasons until I know.  Indeed, for all I know, once I hear about them,
I may switch to using them.

> so you are going into the bush where noone went into, and got a snake
> bite, i don't have any vaccine for that.

Perhaps not, but maybe you can help figure out why the snake is there
and how to get rid of it, or stop it from biting?  Or is strange
behaviour from the code not considered a problem, or worth fixing,
unless the code is being used in a "standard" way?  That would be
rather radical departure from anything I've ever seen NetBSD, or the
net community in general for that matter, espouse before.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B