Re: [DNA] Issue 3: Do we need landmark Y/N bit?

[Sathya Narayanan <sathya@research.panasonic.com>]

Closed.

- Sathya

Sathya Narayanan wrote:

> Issue: The current text doesn't use the 'N' bit - because we don't
> want to waste space on the RA including a No response. The same
> functionality of 'Y' bit can be achieved by just including the 
> landmark prefix in a PIO or a LPO.
>
> Agreement at the meeting: We remove the Y/N bits from the landmark.
> This changes the semantics of a landmark in the RS from a question to
> just a statement, the host includes a prefix in the RS to let the
> router know which link it thinks it is currently on - the router
> confirms it by responding with a RA containing the same prefix or
> informs the host that its thinking is wrong by sending a RA not
> including the particular prefix, but with as much information as
> possible for the host to reconfigure itself.
>
> Any objections to the change?
>
> - Sathya
>