Re: [DNA] Updates to dna-protocol3

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

Greg Daley wrote:
> Hi Brett,
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Greg Daley <Greg.Daley@eng.monash.edu.au>
> Date: Saturday, March 18, 2006 3:11 am
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Updates to dna-protocol3
> To: Brett Pentland <brett.pentland@eng.monash.edu.au>
> Cc: Sathya Narayanan <sathya@research.panasonic.com>, Dna
> <dna@eng.monash.edu.au>
> 
>> Hi Brett.
>>
>>>    If a unicast response is not possible but there is a multicast RA
>>>    already scheduled for transmission in the next 
>>> MulticastRADelay, then
>>>    the Router Solicitation MUST be dropped.
>> What do you mean must be dropped?  How about saying
>>
>> "... then no additional Router Advertisement is generated in response
>> to the Router Solicitation."
>>
> 
> Actually, how about saying?
> 
> "... then the Router Solicitation MUST be silently discarded."
> 
> I think that's what you were getting at?
> 
> Greg

OK.  Fair enough.

Cheers,
Brett.