routing to a directly attached subnet without an address in this subnet

[Lionel Fourquaux]

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 08:50:53PM -0400, David Scheidt wrote:
>On Apr 24, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Lionel Fourquaux wrote:
>> em0 has addresses fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abc and 2001:db8::1
>> em1 has address fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd
>> Network 2001:db8::/64 is directly attached to em0, and network 2001:db8:0:1::/64 is directly attached to em1. The default route points to em0. I would like to route packets addressed to 2001:db8:0:1::/64 to interface em1, without allocating an address in 2001:db8:0:1::/64 for em1. (Or to understand why this would be impossible).
>>
>
>Why do you want to do this?

Because I think it would look better that way.

>  How do you expect the hosts on the attached networks to get packets to you?

They are already using fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd as default gateway, so 
this is not a problem.