Hi Hemant,
On 09-11-09 08:16 PM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
Humble apologies for not reading this lowpan doc, but I have listened to
its core ideas during the past IETFs prezos and understand the link
model being used for it. I still have some general comments that are
worth discussing
]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 11:26 AM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; Pascal Thubert (pthubert); j...@archrock.com;
sami...@ipinfusion.com; c...@tzi.org; Erik Nordmark; Dave Thaler
Subject: Re: off-link model in the 6lowpan talk:
draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07
Hi Hemant,
On 09-11-09
in the 6lowpan talk:
draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07
Suresh,
I have already given an explanation. There is no means in IPv6 ND to
signal a prefix as off-link! It's just that when the L-bit is cleared
the host has to send traffic to the default router.
Hemant
-Original Message-
From: Suresh
Humble apologies for not reading this lowpan doc, but I have listened to
its core ideas during the past IETFs prezos and understand the link
model being used for it. I still have some general comments that are
worth discussing when bringing such work to 6man.
Note that if the multi-link,
in the 6lowpan talk:
draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07
Hemant,
it is probably best if you copy 6low...@ietf.org for discussing this.
Will do - thanks.
Note that if the multi-link, multi-hop network has all client nodes
as off-link to each other, then there is only one type of regular ND
(RFC4861) RA that can
Hemant,
it is probably best if you copy 6low...@ietf.org for discussing this.
Note that if the multi-link, multi-hop network has all client nodes
as off-link to each other, then there is only one type of regular ND
(RFC4861) RA that can signal off-link. This is an RA with no PIO
(Prefix
Carsten presented 6lowpan-nd to 6man today, which was useful. A
comment that came in from Dave Thaler was to re-use the autoconf
model. Everyone should take a look at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model-00
This greatly simplifies the editorial/terminology work
On Nov 10, 2009, at 11:05, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
ND as specified by RFC 4861 has no means to
signal a prefix as off-link, so the L bit cleared is not signaling
off-link.
Right, L=0 does not say this is off-link, it says I'm not saying it
is on-link.
(RFC 4861, section 4.6.2 and
