Archive

> >    The relay agent puts the client's address in the link-address field
> >    regardless of whether the relay agent includes an Interface-id option
> >    in the Relay-forward message.

> Agreed. This is wrong and needs to be fixed. It should say:

>    The relay agent puts a global or site-scoped address with a prefix
>    assigned to the link on which the client should be assigned an
>    address in the link-address field regardless of whether the relay
>    agent includes an Interface-id option in the Relay-forward
>    message.

This clarifies the confusion I had.

> >Any reaosn not to make this 32 bits? the IPv6 API already has 32-bit
> >interface IDs. Is there any reason to make it larger?

> I think it best to keep it variable-length since relays may use this
> for optimization reasons. For example, in 3G specs we were thinking
> of allowing the PDP-Context number on the GGSN to be carried in this
> field (this speeds the return of the reply to the client). While
> this might fit into 32-bits, why force it?

Fine with me.

Thomas

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

Re: [dhcwg] dhcpv6-24: Interface-ID option