Arvind,
I believe that Inverse Discovery (RFC3122) has its own rules, within its own scope, which is Inverse Discovery, as opposed to Discovery. These rules apply generically to the typical users of Inverse Discovery, like ATM, or Frame Relay.
I hope this helps, Alex
arvind saproo wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
If the Source and Target Link Layer Address Options are not included in (IPv6 Over ATM PVC) IND message, then the message will straight-away be considered an invalid one as per the message validation checks
specified in IND RFC (rfc 3122).
A better option would be to zero fill the options
though the options would be useless in that scenario (?)
Alex, could you help on this issue since the authors of IPv6 Over ATM RFC (rfc 2492) are not reachable at the e-mail address specified in the RFC?
Rgds, arvind
-----Original Message-----
From: Nimrod Sterrn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 2:38 PM
To: arvind saproo
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Query:IPv6 Over ATM PVC Operation
see my comments in ==>
-----Original Message----- From: arvind saproo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri, October 01, 2004 3:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Query:IPv6 Over ATM PVC Operation
Hi, I have the following query regarding IPv6 Over ATM PVC operation
(rfc2492).
I would appreciate if someone could answer the same.
Query -
===== RFC does not clearly mention what to fill as the Source/Target
Link Layer address in the Source/Target Link Layer options of IND (Inverse ND) messages.
Also, there is no mention of any reference document which covers the same.
All that is said is [Section 3. PVC Environments] -
"Since ATM PVC links do not use link-layer addresses, the link-layer address options SHOULD not be included in any ND message [11]. If a link-layer address option is present in an ND message, then the option SHOULD be ignored."
==> It may be confusing after reading RFC3122 (inverse ND) which requires
it as part of the solicitation (src and dst LL address) and reply (target LL address).
but since PVC in "permanent" its not needed (?!)
Does this mean that we zero fill the Link Layer address in Source/Target Link Layer options of the IND messages?
This information must be clearly mentioned to avoid interoperability issues.
Thanks for your time, Rgds, arvind
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
