> I still find the PREFIX-DOMAIN TLV confusing. Could you please confirm > that the following is correct: > > 1. the PREFIX-DOMAIN TLV can only appear within a DELEGATED-PREFIX TLV; Correct.
> 2. if a DELEGATED-PREFIX TLV contains no PREFIX-DOMAIN, or if it contains > a PREFIX-DOMAIN with Prefix Length = 0 (possibly among other such TLVs), > then it MAY be used for assignment; otherwise, it MUST NOT be used for > assignment; No, -07 currently says that locally generated prefixes (e.g. ULAs) and those with internet access are "desired" in the sense of draft-ietf-homenet-prefix-assignment (this is not standard normative language). Maybe we should ask Pierre what the actual normative translation to that is, my personal take is that desired means "MUST assign" unless changed by local policy. Anyway others aren't currently "desired" by default, i.e. except by policy. Thinking about that this might be too restrictive since we want to usually just pass on all information to clients by default. So consider this changed for -08, to all are desired by default. I'm currently considering a new type "explicit" or so which says that you must only assign prefixes from this is you can actually identify this by (manufacturer or administrator provided) local policy retaining that functionality. So you can still have special DPs which are only selectively assigned from. Also maybe this thing should be renamed to Prefix Policy TLV since this seems more accurate. 3. if a delegated prefix with non-zero domain is included within a prefix with zero domain, it still causes the (longer, smaller) prefix to be excluded from prefix assignment according to 6.2.1. It is intended as: Delegated Prefixes included within other Delegated Prefixes are ignored, as well as their nested options. I will make this more explicit. Cheers, Steven _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
