Hello Lorenzo: Say the user registers, say, unspecified, is “Address topologically incorrect” the right thing? I can add that code, but how do you return that the requester asks for pure garbage?
Take care, Pascal From: Lorenzo Colitti [mailto:lore...@google.com] Sent: jeudi 20 avril 2017 11:55 To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthub...@cisco.com> Cc: Erik Nordmark <nordm...@sonic.net>; Christian Huitema <huit...@huitema.net>; Brian Haberman <br...@innovationslab.net>; 6lo@ietf.org Subject: Re: [6lo] Draft applicability for 6775bis On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:15 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthub...@cisco.com<mailto:pthub...@cisco.com>> wrote: I also removed the administrative rejection, the return codes are now as follows: [...] | 8 | Invalid Registered Address: The address being registered | | | is not usable on this link, e.g. it is not topologically | | | correct | As worded, it's not clear to me how this option is substantially different from the administrative rejection option. Could it be scoped more tightly, e.g., renamed to "Address topologically incorrect"?
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list 6lo@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
