> I don't think this is necessary. There is plenty of space in RA's to > include the prefixes. So, we're basically talking about the case where > the network administrator has intentionally not advertised all the > prefixes (in which case we need to educate them, but not necessarily in > this document). > > Instead, I'd propose to explain that omitting prefixes could have adverse > effects. (And also, without going into it in too much depth, maybe > describe *which* adverse effects, but that's a potential can of worms.)
Even though an RA contains all the prefixes, there is no indication that it does. After link change, if an RA without the prefix of its current CoA arrives, mobile node can't be sure that its CoA is no longer valid. Hence still uncertainty remains for a mobile node. LR¿¬(®H§‚ 躙šŠX§‚X¬¶*oê'~ŠàÙ¢ž+-«b½ä^ªç¬¶Èm¶›?ÿ 0Ö'~Šàþf¢–f§þX¬¶)ߣø©¿
