> On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:40:52 +0900,
> JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> The attached below is a issue list to make necessary updates on
> RFC2462 (Stateless Address Autoconfiguration).
I've slightly revised the list mainly based on comments received so
far. (Some URLs do not s
> > RFC 2461 says
>
> > Before a host sends an initial solicitation, it SHOULD delay the
> > transmission for a random amount of time between 0 and
> > MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_DELAY.
>
> > RFC 2462 says
>
> > If the Neighbor Solicitation is the first message to be
> sent from an
>
> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:24:08 +0900,
> Soohong Daniel Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I agreed with your mention and this issue is work in progress
> at the DNA BOF. A second BOF will be scheduled during
> this meeting.
> For more reference, please look into this draft.
> http://www.ie
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 18:11:55 -0700,
> Vijay Devarapalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> here is another issue. it involves both 2461 and 2462.
> RFC 2461 says
> Before a host sends an initial solicitation, it SHOULD delay the
> transmission for a random amount of time between 0 an
Dear JINMEI
It seems to me that the following issue needs further clarification.
- Semantics about the L=0 and A=1 case
by Fred Templin, Feb 2003
I think the prefix of L=0 and A=1 may cause an undetected address duplication.
Because the currend DAD scheme uses NS/ NA exchange, which can't
there if I am alive at that time.
Respectfully,
/jim
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of JinHyeock Choi
> Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2003 10:57 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 u
Dear Jim
Thanks for your detailed comments.
I may not be clear enough. This I-D assumes the scenario of a host moving from one
link
to another. In many cases, the term 'a host/node' is actually 'an MN'.
Kindly find my in line comments.
> Comments on this draft. I am unclear but it may be
Dear Vijay
Thanks for bring this up.
Vijay Devarapalli wrote
> hi,
>
> here is another issue. it involves both 2461 and 2462.
>
> RFC 2461 says
>
> Before a host sends an initial solicitation, it SHOULD delay the
> transmission for a random amount of time between 0 and
> MAX_RTR_SOLICITA
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Mip6] Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 update
>
>
> hi,
>
> here is another issue. it involves both 2461 and 2462.
>
> RFC 2461 says
>
> Before a host sends an initial solicitation, it SHOULD delay the
> tra
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 update
>
>
> hi,
>
> here is another issue. it involves both 2461 and 2462.
>
> RFC 2461 says
>
> Before a host sends an initial solicitation, it SHOULD delay t
hi,
here is another issue. it involves both 2461 and 2462.
RFC 2461 says
Before a host sends an initial solicitation, it SHOULD delay the
transmission for a random amount of time between 0 and
MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_DELAY.
RFC 2462 says
If the Neighbor Solicitation is the first messag
11 matches
Mail list logo
