Pekka Savola wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Brian Haberman wrote:
>> This is an update based on feedback received on the list and via
>> private e-mail. Please review and comment. I would still like to
>> solicit input on WG adoption.
>
> Not sure what was the conclusion here, but I gave it a quick a read.
I am awaiting confirmation from Bob Hinden, but I see a consensus to
adopt this document and progress it to standards track.
>
> My main comment is that Section 4 only specifies the behaviour of the
> EFO option (three MUSTs) on transmit. The behaviour on receipt
> (particularly when those MUSTs are ignored) is unspecified.
Good catch. I will add the following text to Section 4 to specify
receive behavior:
- MUST ignore the option if it occurs in NDP messages other than
Router Advertisements
- MUST only process the first occurrence of the option in a
received Router Advertisement
>
> I believe also the RA Option Bit 55-56 under IANA considerations should
> be 54-55 (56 be off by one bít?).
Yes, they are off by one. The experimental ones should be 54-55 and the
available for assignment ones should be 6-53.
Regards,
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
