Hiho,
after we experimented a lot with (especially short) lifetimes on various
platforms and tested renumbering procedures, I have an urgent question.
Shouldn't a client react when its valid lifetime times out and the
interface loses the address?
There may be a number of reasons why RAs stop on a given link or why an
interface doesn't receive them anymore (improper configuration of timers
is just one of them). If so, first the preferred and then the valid
lifetime times out. Usually a system removes the associated address from
its interface.
This may leave the system without a global address while it may still
need one (and could get one). In this case, the system has to wait for
the next RA. This may take a (too) long time, if not infinite.
I would have expected, that immediately when an interface removes its
(last) global address, it will try to obtain a new one, sending out an
immediate RS. This is not the case on various platforms.
RFC2462 does not give this advise or at least I was unable to find it.
Nor does 2462bis do.
So long,
Christian
--
JOIN - IPv6 reference center Christian Schild
A WWU project Westfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Muenster
http://www.join.uni-muenster.de Zentrum fuer Informationsverarbeitung
Team: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Roentgenstrasse 9-13
Priv: [EMAIL PROTECTED] D-48149 Muenster / Germany
GPG-/PGP-Key-ID: 6EBFA081 Fon: +49 251 83 31638, fax: +49 251 83 31653
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
