Sorry - I spotted a couple of other points:
In Section 5.3:
A link-local address is formed by prepending the well-known
link-local prefix [RFC3513] (of appropriate length) to the interface
identifier. If the interface identifier has a length of N bits, the
interface identifier replaces the right-most N zero bits of the
link-local prefix. If the sum of the link-local prefix length and N
is larger than 128,...
Using both the phrases 'of appropriate length' and 'the link local prefix length' is confusing.
The link-local prefix length is fixed in RFC 3513 - it might be clearer to say:
A link-local address is formed by prepending the well-known
link-local prefix [RFC3513] (padded to the appropriate length with zero bits) to the interface
identifier. If the interface identifier has a length of N bits, the
interface identifier replaces the right-most N zero bits of the
link-local prefix extended to 128 bits with zero bits. If the sum of the link-local prefix length and N
is larger than 128,...
In Section 5.5.3 (e), last para:
If an address is formed successfully, the host adds it to the list
of addresses assigned to the interface, initializing its preferred
and valid lifetime values from the Prefix Information option.
I guess it ought to be mentioned that the address also has to pass DAD before being added to the list of addresses:
If an address is formed successfully and DAD shows that it is unique,
the host adds it to the list
of addresses assigned to the interface, initializing its preferred
and valid lifetime values from the Prefix Information option.
Otherwise it looks good.
Regards,
Elwyn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 02 September 2004 13:45
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: new rev. of rfc2462bis will be coming
>
>
> I believe we are almost done about the post-WGLC comments on
> rfc2462bis, and I'm going to submit a new revision, addressing the
> comments.
>
> The release candidate of the new revision is temporarily available at
> http://www.jinmei.org/draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2462bis-06.txt .
>
> If anyone of you finds something missing, it would be nice of you to
> report that.
>
> Thanks, (I really hope there will be no more post-WGLC comments with
> this one:-)
>
> 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
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
