Subject: ISROUTER rules?

From: Markku Savela <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:25:41 +0200

In last Decemeber I tried to get some clarifications to the IS-ROUTER
bit handling in NA. Apparently my interpretation still differs from
TAHI, and as I have hard time deciphering the rules from RFC-2461, I
would like present the question here.

In TAHI section "R flag vs. IsRouter" flag, there are following tests

  unicast rso NA w/o TLL             exp:updated
  unicast rso NA w/ TLL, diff. LLA   exp:unchanged

Why in first case the ISROUTE is supposed to be updated? Because TLL
is not present, it seems to me that logically we don't know whether
LLA is same or not, so we should not change ISROUTER.

Similarly,

  unicast rsO NA w/o TLL             exp:updated
  unicast rsO NA w/ TLL, diff. LLA   exp:updated

the latter is clear, we have the address and update it, but the first
NA does not have TLL, so why should ISROUTE be updated?
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------