Re: [rfc2462bis] summary and proposal about the M/O flags
"Christian Strauf (JOIN)" <ipng@uni-muenster.de> Mon, 24 May 2004 13:07 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA03568 for <ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 24 May 2004 09:07:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BSExn-0003SX-PO for ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:53:56 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4OCrtxc013293 for ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:53:55 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BSEoe-00024J-0t for ipv6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:44:28 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA02395 for <ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:44:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BSEoc-0000jE-Lr for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:44:26 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BSEnq-0000PB-00 for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:43:39 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BSEml-00004D-00 for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:42:31 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BSETy-00078C-A3; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:23:06 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BSEOT-0005yD-TA for ipv6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:17:25 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA01095 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:17:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BSEOS-0000Dx-IO for ipv6@ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:17:24 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BSENa-0007jU-00 for ipv6@ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:16:30 -0400
Received: from ovaron.uni-muenster.de ([128.176.191.5] helo=ovaron.join.uni-muenster.de) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BSEMd-0007Rw-00 for ipv6@ietf.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 08:15:31 -0400
Received: from [128.176.184.156] (KUMMEROG.UNI-MUENSTER.DE [128.176.184.156]) (authenticated bits=0) by ovaron.join.uni-muenster.de (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4OCFJYC007995 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 24 May 2004 14:15:24 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: [rfc2462bis] summary and proposal about the M/O flags
From: "Christian Strauf (JOIN)" <ipng@uni-muenster.de>
To: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達 哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <y7v7jv2132g.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
References: <y7v7jv2132g.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: JOIN-Team, WWU-Muenster
Message-Id: <1085400918.25345.7.camel@kummerog.uni-muenster.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6
Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 14:15:19 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ipv6-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: IP Version 6 Working Group (ipv6) <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jinmei, > Thanks for the feedback on this subject so far. thank you for the comprehensive summary, it looks very good! > 11. revise Section 5.5.2 as follows: > > Even if a link has no routers, stateful autoconfiguration to obtain > addresses and other configuration information may still be > available, and hosts may want to use the mechanism. From the > perspective of autoconfiguration, a link has no routers if no > Router Advertisements are received after having sent a small number > of Router Solicitations as described in RFC 2461 [5]. Since there was a question regarding DHCPv6 and default router information options on the DHC-WG's mailing list, one short question to clarify the meaning of this paragraph: would you say that "routers have to send RAs if they forward packages" is a valid interpretation of this paragraph? Thanks in advance for clarifying this. Christian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
- [rfc2462bis] summary and proposal about the M/O f… JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
- Re: [rfc2462bis] summary and proposal about the M… Christian Strauf (JOIN)