On 14/08/2015 14:46, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: > >> On Aug 13, 2015, at 7:37 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> So I think the -01 draft is wrong, since it says "on-link." > > What is says is > > A host receives prefixes in a Router Advertisement [RFC4861], which > goes on to identify whether they are usable by SLAAC [RFC4862] > [RFC4941] [RFC7217]. When no prefixes are usable for SLAAC, the > Router Advertisement would normally signal the availability of DHCPv6 > [RFC3315] and the host would use it to configure its addresses. In > the latter case it will be generally the case that the configured > addresses match one of the prefixes advertised in a Router > Advertisement that are supposed to be on-link in that subnet. > > Since the host derives fundamental default routing information from > the Route Advertisement, this implies that, in any network with hosts > using multiple prefixes, each prefix SHOULD be advertised via on-link > Prefix Information Options [RFC4861] by one of the attached routers, > even if addresses are being assigned using DHCPv6. A router that > advertises a prefix indicates that it is able to appropriately route > packets with source addresses within that prefix. > > Tell me what to make it say. >
I think all we have to do is delete 'on-link' in the second paragraph. (The 'generally' in the first paragraph allows for the exceptional case that Mikael was concerned about, I think.) Brian _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
