Hello Kees,   
      
   On Friday March 16 2018 18:24, you wrote to Bj”rn Felten:   
      
    BF>>    Ahem, maybe not the most efficient route:   
      
    BF>> X-JAM-PATH2D: 261/38 393/68 770/1 280/464 203/0 2   
      
    KE>  I agree with mark, there is no provision for the most efficient   
    KE> route, and in de the web. The fastest route is alway the winner. As   
    KE> the promotor of the Web, you should be aware of that.   
      
    KE>  You don't want the most efficient route,   
      
   It depends on the definition of "efficient". As IPv6 evangelist, I prefer a   
   path that avoids nodes that do not support IPv6. In the above example only two   
   nodes do not support IPv6, so while it is not optimal, it is not all that bad   
   either...   
      
      
   Cheers, Michiel   
      
   --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303   
    * Origin: he.net certified sage (2:280/5555)