Hi Tom,
(WG chair hat off, individual WG member hat on:)
> 1) Section 5.3 demands "In all cases the RS retransmissions are terminated
> when a RA is received."
> Is this also applicable when a RA is received with router lifetime is set to
> zero (e.g a router going down as suggested in rfc4861).
Well, you could consider it to be, but because of the lifetime it then restarts
right after 0 seconds…
Yes, something like this could be spelled out.
> 2) TBD4 number (155 XXX) conflicts with the one allocated for RPL.
> Is there a other suggested value or one under common agreement outside ND-17
> used for interoperability.
The same is true for TBD1 (31) and TBD2 (32), which have been assigned in the
meantime:
31 DNS Search List Option [RFC6106]
32 Proxy Signature (PS) [RFC-ietf-csi-proxy-send-05.txt]
These should be relatively painless, but 155 might hurt in interop testing.
Good question, I'll defer to the interop testing community.
> 3) Believe there is a typo here? (page 49, section 12)
> o TBD3 = 33
> o TBD4 = 155 XXX
> o TBD3 = 156 XXX -> Believe this is a typo.
Yes, this is a typo; this should be TBD5.
The numbering of course will be solved once we have actual IANA assignments.
Depending on when the spec approval happens, 33 and 156 may also go to other
protocols in the meantime.
I believe we could go for an RFC4020 style early allocation if this uncertainty
creates hardships.
Two other observations:
-- we are at ND-18 already. Please always use the most recent I-D, available
at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd
(and now finally with WG chair hat:)
-- please indicate your name on your mailing list messages (I'm assuming that
Tom is not your only name, which of course could be the case in several
locales).
Grüße, Carsten
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
