Hi Ole, Thanks for your comments. Please find responses inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Ole Troan [mailto:otr...@employees.org] > Sent: September-03-13 10:03 AM > To: Suresh Krishnan > Cc: 6man WG > Subject: Re: 6MAN WG Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-resilient-rs-01> > > [resending] > > all, > > short and sweet document; a few comments if I may. > > - this new behaviour is supposed to be implemented by all hosts, right? > shouldn't this document then update rfc4861?
Sure. Will add the updates tag > - "AP" isn't defined section 1. Will add it. > - section 1 bullet b. couldn't you argue that turning off periodic RAs is a > configuration error? Not sure. It is commonly used in several WLAN and datacenter networks to reduce the amount of multicast traffic. > - section 1 bullet c. If a link isn't multicast capable, you couldn't send RS > in the > general case either. > ISATAP has special provisions for that. could you > make c) more > general? Not sure how to make this more general. Do you have some suggestions? > > - section 2.1. "...results in a default route". is awkward. this is the > function we > call "router discovery" in rfc4861, Would it work if we simply reword " an RA that results in a default route is received" into "an RA with a non-zero Router Lifetime"? Thanks Suresh -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
