[DNA] Proposed resolution to issue 9 for draft-pentland-dna-protocol-01.txt

[Brett Pentland <brett.pentland@eng.monash.edu.au>]

Hi DNA WG,

All of the recent discussion on the issue of RAs that include
a "no" answer in a Landmark Option but also include prefixes
that have been seen on the link, has been in favour of
treating this as an indication that link change has not
taken place.  Here is some proposed text to reflect this:

Old text:

       Instead if the 'N' bit is set in the received Landmark Option, a
       change of link is indicated and the host SHOULD initiate
       reconfiguration using the information in the Router Advertisement.

New text:

       Instead if the 'N' bit is set in the received Landmark Option, AND
       there is no overlap between the list of prefixes in the Router
       Advertisement and the list of prefixes that the host has stored
       for CPL [14], a change of link is indicated and the host SHOULD
       initiate reconfiguration using the information in the Router
       Advertisement.

       If the 'N' bit is set in the received Landmark Option, but there
       is one or more prefixes in the Router Advertisement that are also
       in the list of prefixes the host has stored for CPL, this is an
       indication that no link change has occured but there is prefix
       change underway on the link.  The host MUST NOT invalidate its
       current configuration.

Any comments?
Brett.