Thanks, unfortunately I already submitted the draft but I'll
create a new issue for it. 

Hesham

 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
 > Yukiyo Akisada
 > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 11:02 PM
 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > Subject: RFC2461: be more clearer about TLL option in NA
 > 
 > 
 > Hi, all.
 > 
 > RFC2461 says TLL option SHOULD be requires in NA while 
 > responding to unicast NS.
 > 
 >     4.4.  Neighbor Advertisement Message Format
 >     ----------------------------------------------------------------
 >        1351    Possible options:
 >        1352
 >        1353       Target link-layer address
 >        1354                      The link-layer address for 
 > the target, i.e., the
 >        1355                      sender of the 
 > advertisement.  This option MUST be
 >        1356                      included on link layers 
 > that have addresses when
 >        1357                      responding to multicast 
 > solicitations.  When
 >        1358                      responding to a unicast 
 > Neighbor Solicitation this
 >        1359                      option SHOULD be included.
 > 
 > but RFC2461 also says 'MAY' be omitted.
 > 
 >     7.2.4.  Sending Solicited Neighbor Advertisements
 >     ----------------------------------------------------------------
 >        3387                          If the solicitation's 
 > IP Destination Address is
 >        3388    not a multicast address, the Target 
 > Link-Layer Address option MAY be
 >        3389    omitted; the neighboring node's cached value 
 > must already be current
 >        3390    in order for the solicitation to have been received.
 > 
 > It isn't contradiction, but it is unclear.
 > 
 > The former seems that it disallows omission of TLL option,
 > and the latter seems that it allows omission.
 > 
 > I think 2461bis can be more clear about this option.
 > 
 > Regards.
 > 
 > 
 > ----
 > Yukiyo Akisada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > 
 > --------------------------------------------------------------------
 > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
 > --------------------------------------------------------------------
 > 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to