Draft-ietf-ipv6-2461bis-02 update
Objective • Summarise the status of the draft • Briefly describe the updates • Describe plans for the next rev
Status • Draft passed WG LC • Late Comments from Pekka Savola included in the current revision (see Appendix F for changes) • Further comments on processing of messages received without SLLAO are not completely addressed in the draft.
Receiving messages without SLLAO • Problem: RFC 2461 (and bis) miss the case where an RS, NS or NA are received without an SLLAO. The current revision of the draft only addresses this issue for the RS. • The problem is not significant for NAs as they are inherently unreliable and no response is expected.
Suggestion • Text to go under section 7.2 (from Greg Daley): “ I t i s possi bl e t hat a host m ay r ecei ve a sol i ci t at i on or a r out er adver t i sem ent w i t hout a l i nk- l ayer addr ess opt i on i ncl uded. These m essages w i l l not cr eat e or updat e nei ghbor cache ent r i es, except w i t h r espect t o t he I sR out er f l ag as speci f i ed i n Sect i ons X X X and Y Y Y . I f a nei ghbour cache ent r y does not exi st f or t he sour ce of such a m essage, A ddr ess R esol ut i on w i l l be r equi r ed bef or e uni cast com m uni cat i ons w i t h t hat addr ess t o begi n. Thi s i s par t i cul ar l y r el evant f or uni cast r esponses t o sol i ci t at i ons w her e an addi t i onal packet exchange i s r equi r ed f or adver t i sem ent del i ver y. ”
Suggestion …cont • Clarify the processing for receiving an NS and NA without the SLLAO in the relevant sections as per text on the last slide.
Other changes • Comments were received from Tatuya Jinmei and were agreed to on the list. The next revision will incorporate modifications.
Recommend
More recommend
