> I don't think I said an on-link prefix was required. All I have ever > said is that, as per the RFC5942, if you want to have an on-link > prefix, you must announce it in a PIO (without the A bit if you don't > want it to be used for SLAAC). Steinar gave an example which could > imply that wasn't the case, but his example was actually one where an > on-link prefix wasn't required. IOW, his example didn't disprove my > statement, it only showed that there are some situations where no PIO > announced prefix has a use case - where all destinations are required > to be considered off-link.
I have a similar use case where some information seems to be missing in the RFCs. Or maybe I haven't read them in sufficient detail. Assume I want to assign addresses to clients using DHCPv6, using only a link-local next-hop. So my router is sending RA with M and O bits set and no PIO. However, my client requests IA_NA, not IA_PD. The question is: *What netmask should the client use for the received address* in this case? The only obvious alternatives I can think of are /64 and /128, since the IA_NA address doesn't include a prefix length. Can anybody point me to RFCs which describe this? Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, [email protected] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
