[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: draft-wbeebee-ipv6-cpe-router-04 comments
On Mar 23, 2009, at 14:08, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
We can certainly mandate in the Unnumbered section that the WAN
interface MUST send an RS.
I think that might help clarify the issue.
This draft takes the position taken by RFC 4861 which in section 4.2
says [Future versions of this protocol may define new option types.
Receivers MUST silently ignore any options they do not recognize
and continue processing the message.]
Does RFC 4191 not predate RFC 4861? Yes, I realize that RFC 4191 was
not categorized as an update of RFC 2461, the predecessor of RFC 4861,
but it's really not fair to treat a standards-track RFC published over
three years ago as a "future" specification.
If the draft doesn't want to take a position on whether CPE routers
MUST, SHOULD NOT, MAY or MAY NOT process RFC 4191 More Specific Route
options, then I think it would help to be explicit about it.
james woodyatt <email@example.com>
member of technical staff, communications engineering