Re: usage of rebind for PD (Re: [dhcwg] WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-02.txt)

>>>>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2003 23:16:31 +0000, 
>>>>> Ole Troan <ot@cisco.com> said:

>> Since this is a MAY, the delegating router (i.e. server) MAY NOT send
>> a Reply message, which will cause a bad effect (that the invalid
>> prefix is going to be used).  For the case of address assignment, this
>> should be a minor issue, because this situation only happens when none
>> of the events to issue a Confirm happen but the upstream router has
>> somehow been swapped.

> Rebind is only done for 10 seconds (using Confirms timers), then the
> client goes back to Solicit state.

Ah, okay, I missed the point.  Then I'm fine with the current
specification.  It would still be helpful to explicitly note that
Rebind only continues for 10 seconds, though.

>> It would also be helpful to describe how the requesting should react
>> to this event.

> requesting router should go to Solicit state. I think this will be
> made clearer in modified base spec/new PD revision where we'll use
> NotOnLink rather than lifetimes = 0.

Hmm, opt-prefix-delegation-03 still says:

   Rebind message      If the delegating router cannot find a binding
(...)
                       the delegating router MAY
                       send a Reply message to the requesting router
                       containing the IA_PD with the lifetimes of the
                       prefixes in the IA_PD set to zero.

or are you talking about a change in a future revision?

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg