Hi Erik,

On 11/25/2012 11:43 PM, Erik Kline wrote:
> Was there discussion of the status of this document in Atlanta, and I
> just missed it?

You are right. There was no discussion of this at the Atlanta F2F meeting.

> 
> One tweak I think the document might need is just a single-sentence
> clarification that this does not modify the start-up randomization for
> the first RS, vis. the MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_DELAY (i.e. start-up
> random delay still applies).

Sounds good. Will do.

> 
> I suppose whether or not this officially updates 4861 and/or becomes a
> recommended modification to the node requirements doc will need to
> wait for implementation feedback from the field.

Personally, I believe this document updates 4861 and if the WG agrees,
we can put in the Updates: tag into the draft. Seeing that ND fixes have
usually been rolled into the node requirements updates, hopefully the
next version (6434bis?) will pick this up.

Thanks
Suresh


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to