Subject: possible typo in ipv6-privacy-addrs-v2

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉<[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 15:11:45 +0900

Hello,

In the separate discussion about the "privacy-only" configuration, I
found something odd in the privacy-addrs-v2 draft.  In section 3.3
(rev. 04), it states:

   4.  When creating a temporary address, the lifetime values MUST be
       derived from the corresponding prefix as follows:

       *  Its Valid Lifetime is the lower of the Valid Lifetime of the
          public address or TEMP_VALID_LIFETIME

       *  Its Preferred Lifetime is the lower of the Preferred Lifetime
          of the prefix or TEMP_PREFERRED_LIFETIME - DESYNC_FACTOR.

Why does the second bullet mention the preferred lifetime of the
"prefix", not of the "public address"?  The corresponding text in the
original RFC3041 is as follows,

   3) When creating a temporary address, the lifetime values are derived
      from the corresponding public address as follows:

      -  Its Valid Lifetime is the lower of the Valid Lifetime of the
         public address or TEMP_VALID_LIFETIME.
      -  Its Preferred Lifetime is the lower of the Preferred Lifetime
         of the public address or TEMP_PREFERRED_LIFETIME -
         DESYNC_FACTOR.

which specifies the "public address" lifetimes for both cases.  This
has been changed since privacy-addrs-v2-01, but I could not find the
reason for this in the change history.  It seems a simple typo to me.
Or is there any special reason for specifying the "prefix" lifetime
here?

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]

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

---

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:46:11 -0400

Hi Jinmei,
   It is just a typo. I will fix it in the next revision.

Cheers
Suresh