> However, I think the receiving node should still consider the prefix > as valid in terms of ND (i.e., consider it as "on-link") and modify > the next-hop determination accordingly. > > The questions are: > > 1. is this a correct understanding of the intention of RFC2461? > 2. if yes, is this a reasonable behavior? > 3. if yes (for both 1 and 2), should this explicitly be documented in > rfc2461bis?
This separation was the intent AFAIK, thus I answer "yes" on 1. If implementors have missed this then it sure should be clarified in the spec. If all or almost all of the implementors have missed this and we don't have a good reason for this behavior we should consider changing the specification. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
