JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?=
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a quick question about RFC2462 (stateless address
> autoconfiguration). I know we've had a similar discussion before, but
> please let me repeat it...
> The RFC defines the notion of "StoredLifetime" as follows:
> e) If the advertised prefix matches the prefix of an autoconfigured
> address (i.e., one obtained via stateless or stateful address
> autoconfiguration) in the list of addresses associated with the
> interface, the specific action to perform depends on the Valid
> Lifetime in the received advertisement and the Lifetime
> associated with the previously autoconfigured address (which we
> call StoredLifetime in the discussion that follows):
> In my understanding, StoredLifetime is the "remaining" lifetime to
> expiration at the time when the new Router Advertisement is received.
> So, for example, if we first received a prefix with the valid lifetime
> being 7200 seconds, and then received a next advertisement 1800
> seconds later, the StoredLifetime corresponding to the address from
> the prefix should be 5400 (= 7200 - 1800) seconds.
Yes, that is how this should be interpreted.
> I believe this interpretation is correct, and I've implemented RFC
> 2462 in this manner. However, a user of our implementation said it
> was *not* what RFC2462 says, because
> > all "Lifetime associated with the address" pseudo-definitions are
> > very, very careful not to say the Lifetime is actually being
> > decremented.
> (cited the user's message)
A quick scan of the text suggests to me that this could be worded a
bit better than it currently is.
> But is there any other interpretation of StoredLifetime? I'm now
> confused, so I'd like to hear authors' intention.
This author agrees with your original intepretation.
Thomas
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
