On 05/26/10 03:21 PM, Tetsuya Murakami wrote:
Hi All,
According to the current 6lowpan-nd draft, I have one question.
The draft mentioned NS must include SLLA option in order to inform
the link-layer address of the host. However when the router receives
RS message from the host, the router responds RA to the host. At that
time, the router needs to know the link-layer address of the host in
order to send out RA to the host. So, I think SLLA option of the host
must be included in RS instead of NS.
We should make it clear that the SLLA is required in the RS.
FWIW the ability to omit them in RFC4861 is for the case of sending a RS
before DAD has completed, in which case RFC4861 allows an unspecified
source address in the RS. We don't need that for 6lowpan.
But we still need SLLA in the NS, since it is the SLLA plus the ARO that
are used to form the registration with the router.
According to the current ND draft, after receiving RS message, the
router sends NS message in order to solve the link layer address of
the host by using solicited node multicast address. In order to
eliminate the multicast packet as much as possible, I recommend to
include SLLA option in RS instead of NS.
I don't think there is anything in 6lowpan-nd-09 that says that the
router should multicast a NS in this case. (RFC 4861 implementations
might do that, or might instead multicast the RA to all-nodes.)
Do you have a pointer to specific text in 6lowpan-nd-09 that says this,
or that isn't sufficiently clear on never sending multicast NS?
Erik
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
