Subject: IPv6 Work Group Last Call for "Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes"

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 May 2004 17:13:44 -0700

This is a IPv6 working group last call for comments on advancing the 
following document as an Proposed Standard:

	Title		: Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes
	Author(s)	: R. Draves, D. Thaler
	Filename	: draft-ietf-ipv6-router-selection-03.txt
	Pages		: 13
	Date		: 2003-12-18

This is a two week working group last call that will end on May 18, 2004.

Please direct substantive comments to the IPv6 mailing list.  Editorial 
comments can be sent directly to the authors.

Regards,
Bob & Brian
IPv6 WG co-chairs

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Timothy Gleeson \(tgleeson\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 13:56:46 +0900

Rich, Dave,

Quick comment/question on the router selection spec.

When a parameter is changed (e.g. the operator changes the default
router preference or adds a route option) what should the router do?
I guess it's implicit it should do the same as [RFC2461,6.2.4,last
para] i.e. as for "becoming an advertising interface". If so, could
this be made explicit?

When a router interface is going down: [RFC2461,6.2.5] currently says
(roughly) "SHOULD transmit one or more RAs with Router Lifetime
zero". I'm uncertain if this would clear a ::/0 route in a type C host
- the text currently says "updates a ::/0 route ... based on the Router
Advertisement message header". Does "update"
encompass "delete"? Also, such a final RA wouldn't clear any more
specific routes. Does the latter case need some more text e.g. "SHOULD
send all more specific routes with lifetime zero" or somesuch?

Thanks.

Tim

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 12:40:55 +0300 (EEST)

> comments can be sent directly to the authors.

My comments from Feb 29th still apply. (I don't recall there was 
response.)

The link to the archives is below:

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/ipv6/current/msg01829.html

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings