> >Why don't you set the valid lifetime to 0 as well? > > > >If a new host is connecting to the network while you're advertising the > >max(old valid lft, 2h) valid lifetime, it will actually auto-configure > >itself with an address from the withdrawn prefix. If you set valid > >lifetime to 0, it won't. > > Sounds good, i don't mind. Just have to phrase so that it's sent more than > once in any case. We could also say it needs to be sent in 3 successive RAs > independent of the time frame. What do you people think?
I agree with the usefulness of setting valid lifetime = 0. And that's what I would prefer to see happen. I don't think 3 RAs will solve the problem that was expressed to me regarding renumbering. The problem was: A laptop was in "sleep" mode when the RA deprecating the prefix was sent. When the laptop woke up, it still had the prefix, and no indication the prefix shouldn't be used. The laptop expected to be able to use the prefix up to the prefix's original validity and with the original preference, in the absence of newer info regarding that prefix. This is why I think it would be great if the deprecated prefix continued to be sent (in RA and HNCP) until its original valid lifetime expired. But I would prefer for it to be sent with valid lifetime = 0. Barbara _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
