[6lo] Re: Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-6lo-multicast-registration-18: (with COMMENT)

[Pascal Thubert <[e-mail]>]

Will do, Luigi.

that's RFC 6550 and RFC 9010.

all the best,

Pascal

Le mer. 15 mai 2024 à 08:33, Luigi IANNONE <[e-mail]> a
écrit :

> Hi Pascal,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the reply. It makes sense. Thanks.
>
> As a nit, I would add the reference to the relevant RFC right after
> “processed normally”.
>
>
>
> Thanks again
>
>
>
> Ciao
>
>
>
> L.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Pascal Thubert <[e-mail]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 14 May 2024 18:29
> *To:* Luigi Iannone <[e-mail]>
> *Cc:* Paul Wouters <[e-mail]>; The IESG <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> *Subject:* [6lo] Re: Paul Wouters' No Objection on
> draft-ietf-6lo-multicast-registration-18: (with COMMENT)
>
>
>
> Hello Luigi:
>
>
>
> We define the same P-field in EARO and RTO. RTO is not the registration,
> it is the RPL target.
>
> In RTO, the prefix length was always there so there's really no difference
> in operation for 0 and 3. A legacy router uses 0 for a prefix as well as
> for an address, because it treats an address as just another prefix with a
> len of 128 for its routing purposes.
>
> For 6LoWPAN ND the concept of prefix length was not present so the prefix
> registration by a new node to a legacy 6LR would not result as expected.
> This is why the registration (EARO, EDAC) is rejected with a code 12.
>
>
>
> makes sense?
>
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
>
> Le mar. 14 mai 2024 à 14:12, Luigi Iannone <[e-mail]> a écrit :
>
> Hi Pascal,
>
> I have a small clarification question on this part:
> >
> >    *  When the value of 3 is received in an RTO (see Section 6.5), this
> >       value MUST be ignored by the receiver, meaning, treated as a value
> >       of 0, but the message is processed normally.
> >
>
> What do you mean exactly by “processed normally”?
> If 3 and 0 are treated in the same way does it mean  I can register a
> prefix using value 0 ?
> Or does it mean that even receiving a prefix registration message from a
> node supporting [I-D.ietf-6lo-prefix-registration] if the receiving node
> does not support that specification the global effect will be the
> registration of a unicast address (not a prefix)?
>
> Thanks
>
> Luigi
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Pascal
>


-- 
Pascal