#84: Unicast RA clarification
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Reporter: z...@… | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: trivial | Milestone:
Component: nd | Version:
Severity: - | Keywords:
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Issue from ZigBee IP testing:
RA unicast/broadcast: regarding including SLLAO to ‘enable’
multicast. It does not specify in 4861 that you should unicast It’s
just a MAY and in fact suggests it probably wouldn’t be done
(section 6.2.6). Should RS have SLLAO in Src LL64 Dst All routers
multicast, SLLAO. Or should RA be MAC level broadcast? (IPv6
multicast?)
Proposed solution:
it is correct that 4861 discourages unicast RA, so perhaps we should add
some text making it clear that lowpan-nd ignores such discouragement.
Something like this in section 6.3:
FROM:
A router processes Router Solicitation messages as specified in
[RFC4861]. The differences relate to the inclusion of Authoritative
Border Router options in the Router Advertisement (RA) messages.
TO:
A router processes Router Solicitation messages as specified in
[RFC4861]. The differences relate to the inclusion of Authoritative
Border Router options in the Router Advertisement (RA) messages, and
the exclusive use of unicast Router Advertisements.
and then add a paragraph later in 6.3 saying:
Unlike RFC4861 which suggests multicast Router Advertisements, this
specification optimizes the exchange by always unicasting RAs in response
to RSs. This is possible since the RS always includes a SLLA option, which
is used by the router to unicast the RA.
--
Ticket URL: <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/trac/ticket/84>
6lowpan <http://tools.ietf.org/6lowpan/>
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
