Peter, Tatuya
(B
(BThanks for catching that.
(B
(BComments below
(B
(B > > On page 59, 7.2.5 is written:
(B > ->
(B > > If the Neighbor Cache entry is not in INCOMPLETE state,
(B > the receiving
(B > > node performs the following steps:
(B >
(B > > - It records the link-layer address in the Neighbor
(B > Cache entry.
(B >
(B > > - If the advertisement's Solicited flag is set, the
(B > state of the
(B > > entry is set to REACHABLE, otherwise it is set to STALE.
(B >
(B > > - It sets the IsRouter flag in the cache entry based
(B > on the Router
(B > > flag in the received advertisement.
(B >
(B > > - It sends any packets queued for the neighbor awaiting address
(B > > resolution.
(B > > <-
(B > > In version 1 of the draft the same paragraph was applied to state
(B > > INCOMPLETE.
(B > > The whole paragraph can nor refer to state not INCOMPLETE,
(B > as in such a
(B > > state
(B > > There should be no queued packets.
(B >
(B > I think you're correct. This (the "not") should be a misspelling.
(B >
(B > I don't know the background of this change, even if we removed the
(B > "not"... The corresponding part of RFC2461 is:
(B >
(B > =============================================================
(B > ==========
(B > If the target's Neighbor Cache entry is in the INCOMPLETE
(B > state when
(B > the advertisement is received, one of two things happens. If the
(B > link layer has addresses and no Target Link-Layer address
(B > option is
(B > included, the receiving node SHOULD silently discard the received
(B > advertisement. Otherwise, the receiving node performs
(B > the following
(B > steps:
(B >
(B > - It records the link-layer address in the Neighbor Cache entry.
(B >
(B > - If the advertisement's Solicited flag is set, the state of the
(B > entry is set to REACHABLE, otherwise it is set to STALE.
(B >
(B > - It sets the IsRouter flag in the cache entry based on
(B > the Router
(B > flag in the received advertisement.
(B >
(B > - It sends any packets queued for the neighbor awaiting address
(B > resolution.
(B >
(B > Note that the Override flag is ignored if the entry is in the
(B > INCOMPLETE state.
(B > =============================================================
(B > ==========
(B >
(B > and this part of 2461bis now reads:
(B >
(B > =============================================================
(B > ==========
(B > In any state, if the link layer has addresses and an unsolicited
(B > Neighbor Advertisement is received with the O flag
(B > cleared, with no
(B > Target Link-Layer address option included, the receiving
(B > node SHOULD
(B > silently discard the received advertisement.
(B >
(B > If the target's Neighbor Cache entry is in the INCOMPLETE
(B > state when
(B > the advertisement is received, one of two things happen: If the
(B > advertisement were solicited, the state is changed to REACHABLE.
(B > Otherwise, the state is set to STALE. Note that the
(B > Override flag is
(B > ignored if the entry is in the
(B > INCOMPLETE state.
(B >
(B > If the Neighbor Cache entry is not in INCOMPLETE state,
(B > the receiving
(B > node performs the following steps:
(B >
(B > - It records the link-layer address in the Neighbor Cache entry.
(B >
(B > - If the advertisement's Solicited flag is set, the state of the
(B > entry is set to REACHABLE, otherwise it is set to STALE.
(B >
(B > - It sets the IsRouter flag in the cache entry based on
(B > the Router
(B > flag in the received advertisement.
(B >
(B > - It sends any packets queued for the neighbor awaiting address
(B > resolution.
(B > =============================================================
(B > ==========
(B >
(B > I suspect the first paragraph (new in 2461bis) tried to catch
(B > something, but the entire result does not seem to implement the
(B > intent...
(B
(B=> RFC 2461 was unclear about the "two things" that it referred to. I believe
(Bit was
(Byour comment to change this paragraph that resulted in the change. I think the
(B"not" was a typo and should be removed. Do you see any other errors in the
(Bcurrent
(Blogic compared to 2461?
(B
(BHesham
(B
(B
(B >
(B > JINMEI, Tatuya
(B > Communication Platform Lab.
(B > Corporate R&D Center,
(B > Toshiba Corp.
(B > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(B >
(B > --------------------------------------------------------------------
(B > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
(B > ipv6@ietf.org
(B > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
(B > --------------------------------------------------------------------
(B >
(B
(B===========================================================
(BThis email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
(B of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is strictly
(B prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender
(B and delete all copies.
(B===========================================================
(B
(B
(B--------------------------------------------------------------------
(BIETF IPv6 working group mailing list
(Bipv6@ietf.org
(BAdministrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
(B--------------------------------------------------------------------
