IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Re: PD lifetimes

Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com> Thu, 06 February 2003 18:56 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00246 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:56:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h16J3Kn23174 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 14:03:20 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h16J3Kp23171 for <dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 14:03:20 -0500
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00236 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:56:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h16J1Kp23098; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 14:01:20 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h16J10p23070 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 14:01:00 -0500
Received: from pheriche.sun.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00165 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:53:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from bebop.France.Sun.COM ([129.157.174.15]) by pheriche.sun.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA19717; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 11:57:33 -0700 (MST)
Received: from lillen (punchin-nordmark.Eng.Sun.COM [192.9.61.11]) by bebop.France.Sun.COM (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with SMTP id h16IvTP10218; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 19:57:29 +0100 (MET)
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 19:53:48 +0100
From: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com>
Reply-To: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Re: PD lifetimes
To: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
Cc: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: "Your message with ID" <y7vk7gewslp.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
Message-ID: <Roam.SIMC.2.0.6.1044557628.2858.nordmark@bebop.france>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

> The restriction above is not that strict.  The client can use a fixed
> RA valid lifetime which is much smaller than the PD valid lifetime.
> This is because I prefer a larger default value for the PD valid
> lifetime.

Ah - sorry for not understanding that the first time around.

That makes sense. Means we don't need P and V flags, right?

And the document could say that if the PD lifetimes exceed the RFC 2461
defaults the router should use those defaults, otherwise it should use the PD
lifetimes and decrement them in real time.

  Erik

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status