Re: 6MAN WG Last Call - draft-ietf-6man-multi-homed-host-03.txt

["Fred Baker (fred)" <[e-mail]>]

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:35 PM, Bob Hinden <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Brian, Fred,
> 
> I started the w.g. last call.  I read the draft again, looks fine overall.  I think it would helpful if it was clearer as to what the update is for RFC4861.  Having done some updates a few times recently, it better to be very clear what the change is.
> 
> I like the “Bob” and “Alice” host names.  Maybe it should be “Ole” and “Bob” :-)

The text in question is, at least,

   Note that, apart from ensuring that a message with a given source
   address is given to a first-hop router that appears to know about the
   prefix in question, this specification is consistent with [RFC4861].
   Nevertheless, implementers of Sections 5.2, 6.2.3, 6.3.4 and 8 of RFC
   4861 will need to extend their implementations accordingly.  This
   specification is fully consistent with [RFC6724] and implementers
   will need to add support for its Rule 5.5.  Hosts that do not support
   these features may fail to communicate in the presence of filters as
   described above.

Section 5.2 basically says that on-link prefixes should result in local traffic ("the next hop address is the destination address") and off-link prefixes operate as described in 6.3.6. Based on that, I think this draft is primarily proposing an inserted step in 6.3.6:

0) IF the source address is a member of a prefix being advertised to the host in an RA, the set of routers being considered as possible next hops is limited to the set of routers advertising the prefix, as opposed to "all neighboring routers".

(which there may be a better way of wording)

Regarding 6.2.3 and 6.2.4, I need to defer to my co-author; I'm not sure what he had in mind. It may have to do with the RIO/PIO/DIO considerations in the draft.

In Section 8, there is a limitation on the set of routers a router might redirect to: it MUST be among the set of routers advertising the indicated prefix in its RA, or the redirecting router must in some other way know that it has the information necessary for SADR routing.

If putting words directly into draft-ietf-6man-multi-homed-host would help you with a 4861bis, we can do that.