>>>>> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 11:19:24 -0700 (PDT), >>>>> Erik Nordmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> It seems to me that this specification allows (e.g.,) the prefix >> "::/0" to update the lifetimes all existing addresses (which may even >> include link-local addresses), since ::/0 matches any addresses. >> >> Is this the intended behavior? I believe not, and if not, shouldn't >> the specification be clearer to avoid this case? I believe it should. > I don't think this was the intent, thus it makes sense to clarify the > specification. > My take in this is that there is basically two levels: > 1. Maintaining the set of addrconf prefixes based on what is received > in router advertisements and timeouts. > 2. Configure addresses from those prefixes (which have a lifetime based > on the lifetime of the underlying prefix). > I don't know if it makes sense to structure the text that way. > BTW: Is there a separate issue about the interaction of the lifetime > in the advertised prefixes and addresses that are not configured > using stateless? (For instance, would these lifetimes affect > the addresses configured manually or with DHCP?) As I stated in a previous message (the latest one in this thread), there *was* an issue in RFC2462 but rfc2462bis would be able to avoid it since rfc2462bis will concentrate on the stateless part of the address configuration (as a result of clarifying the M/O flags). >> e) If the prefix advertised does not match the prefix of an address >> already in the list, make a new address from the prefix >> f) If the prefix advertised does match the prefix of an address >> already in the list, update the lifetimes of the address > I still think this is underspecified since you haven't defined > what "match the prefix" means. You'd need to state that two prefixes > match when the length of the prefixes is identical and the "length" > first bits are identical. > Otherwise folks might read this the same as "prefix advertised > matches an address" I first would like to know your opinion, if any, on my latest question (in the separate message). If we choose option 1 (i.e., basically do nothing on this), we still might want to clarify what "match the prefix" means to avoid possible confusion. Thanks, JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------