Re: RFC2461bis: Empty default router lists [was: RE: Comments for rc 2461bis]

2004-10-26 Thread Pekka Savola
Hi, On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Elwyn Davies wrote: Quoting from S5.2: Next-hop determination for a given unicast destination operates as follows. The sender performs a longest prefix match against the Prefix List to determine whether the packet's destination is on- or off-link. If the

RFC2461bis: Empty default router lists [was: RE: Comments for rc 2461bis]

2004-10-26 Thread Elwyn Davies
Hi. Quoting from S5.2: Next-hop determination for a given unicast destination operates as follows. The sender performs a longest prefix match against the Prefix List to determine whether the packet's destination is on- or off-link. If the destination is on-link, the next-hop

RE: RFC2461bis: Multicast capable vs Multicast Service [was RE: Comments for rc2461bis]

2004-10-26 Thread Soliman, Hesham
Title: RFC2461bis: Multicast capable vs Multicast Service [was RE: Comments for rc2461bis] Your mail server forgot ;) Using the term 'multicast services' around this area is confusing. If the link MUST provide multicast services maybe that is something that should be in the basic

RE: RFC2461bis: Empty default router lists [was: RE: Comments for rc2461bis]

2004-10-26 Thread Soliman, Hesham
Quoting from S5.2: Next-hop determination for a given unicast destination operates as follows. The sender performs a longest prefix match against the Prefix List to determine whether the packet's destination is on- or off-link. If the destination is on-link, the

further clarifications on M/O flags in rfc2462bis

2004-10-26 Thread JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
Hello, Based on a recent discussion on rfc2462bis with Margaret in a part of her AD review results, I now think we'll need further clarifications on the M/O flags. As I said in a previous response to Margaret, we have decided and made the following change to rfc2462bis: 1. remove some mandatory