Tatuya, When you have the time, please do me a favor and email the complete paragraph(s) of text you want added as section 5.4.4 for 2461bis. I can review it right away.
Thanks. Hemant -----Original Message----- From: JINMEI Tatuya / ???? [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 12:05 PM To: Hemant Singh (shemant) Cc: ipv6@ietf.org Subject: Re: Revisit: one remaining corner case in DAD At Thu, 5 Jul 2007 11:06:26 -0400, "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Having taken care of an NA target address that happens to be any > address assigned to the receiving interface, now we are left with only > a target address that is in ND cache of the receiving interface. Once > a tentative address has been taken care of, the processing of NA goes > into checking if target address lies in ND cache of the receiving > interface and hence section 7.2.5 of 2461bis applies - this rule takes > care of an unsolicited NA sent by a neighbor to the interface. Such > unsolicited NA's are used by nodes to update new ND information to neighbors. My point is that it's not so obvious (at least to me) by simply saying "If the target address is not tentative, the advertisement is processed as described in [I-D.ietf-ipv6-2461bis]". Hence my proposed text. I'm not sure whether you agree with it or not, but I'm still not convinced that referring to 2461bis is enough. So, I still plan to keep my proposed change unless I hear otherwise from others. Thanks, JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
