Re: [DNA] MUST NOT add DNA Option when landmark RA = NO?(draft-pentland-dna-protocol-00.txt)

[Greg Daley <greg.daley@eng.monash.edu.au>]

Hi Brett,

Brett Pentland wrote:
> MUST NOT is probably too strong.  SHOULD NOT or even MAY NOT
> might be ok.  I don't think there's much value
> in the DNA option in this case, because the host cannot use the
> prefixes in it for configuration. Those same prefixes
> should arrive in PIOs in RAs from the router(s) where they are
> explicitly configured, very soon anyway.

Can't the host use the prefixes learnt from the DNAO to not be
surprised by prefixes in responding RAs (which may not be DNA RAs)
to its existing solicitation?

Greg