Search RFCs

RFC Editor

Found 2 records.

Status:Verified (1)

RFC 6204, "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers", April 2011

Note: This RFC has been obsoleted byRFC 7084

Errata ID:3054
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Tore Anderson
Date Reported: 2011-12-16
Verifier Name: ron bonica
Date Verified: 2012-01-03

Section 4.3 says:

   L-13:  If the delegated prefix changes, i.e., the current prefix is          replaced with a new prefix without any overlapping time          period, then the IPv6 CE router MUST immediately advertise the          old prefix with a Preferred Lifetime of zero and a Valid          Lifetime of the lower of the current Valid Lifetime and 2          hours (which must be decremented in real time) in a Router          Advertisement message as described in Section 5.5.3, (e) of          [RFC4862].

It should say:

   L-13:  If the delegated prefix changes, i.e., the current prefix is          replaced with a new prefix without any overlapping time          period, then the IPv6 CE router MUST immediately advertise the          old prefix with a Preferred Lifetime of zero and a Valid          Lifetime of either a) zero, or b) the lower of the current          Valid Lifetime and 2 hours (which must be decremented in real          time), in a Router Advertisement message as described in          Section 5.5.3, (e) of [RFC4862].

Notes:

The original text in L-13 prohibits implementers from transmitting Valid Lifetime = 0 whenever a prefix needs to be invalidated. It should not, because transmitting VL=0 is easier to implement than sending "the lower of the current Valid Lifetime and 2 hours (which must be decremented in real time)".

Transmitting Valid Lifetime = 0 has the exact same effect on a host as the procedure described in the original text, i.e., it will the host to lower (but never raise) the remaining valid lifetime to 7200 seconds.

Status:Rejected (1)

RFC 6204, "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers", April 2011

Note: This RFC has been obsoleted byRFC 7084

Errata ID:3175
Status: Rejected
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Sathyanarayana Venkataramanappa
Date Reported: 2012-04-04
Rejected by: RonBonica
Date Rejected: 2012-04-16

Section 4.2 says:

WPD-3:  The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to accept a delegated           prefix size different from what is given in the hint.  If the           delegated prefix is too small to address all of its           interfaces, the IPv6 CE router SHOULD log a system management           error.

It should say:

WPD-3:  The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to accept a delegated           prefix size different from what is given in the hint.  If the           delegated prefix is too small to address all of its           interfaces or delegated prefix size is greater than /64, the            IPv6 CE router SHOULD log a system management           error.

Notes:

Stateless Address Auto configuration uses 64 bit long EUI-64. If Delegated prefix size obtained on the wan side is greater than /64. This Prefix cannot be used on Lan side nodes to create SLAAC address using EUI-64
--VERIFIER NOTES--
RFC 6204 is about to be obsoleted by draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis, which entered WG last call this weekend. So, fixing 6204 won't help much.

Please post a message to the V6OPS mailing list making the point that you make in the errata. If the WG agrees, the change will be made in the bis document.

Report New Errata