Re: RFC5798 requires usage of RAs?

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:36:44AM -0400, Stephen Nadas wrote:
> Sorry for the delay.  I think the spec language could be better- 
> (630) etc probably should have said something more like 
> 
> "if ND RAs are in use, MUST send ND Router Advertisements for the virtual router. 

Indeed. Thanks for the confirmation.

My understanding of IETF procedures is, that an Errata submission would
be possible, valid way to unambiguate that language - which is advisable
to prevent further implementation confusion.

Shall I go ahead and draft up an erratum or do you want to take up
on that yourself?

Best regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [email protected] -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
_______________________________________________
vrrp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp