Hello Luigi: We define the same P-field in EARO and RTO. RTO is not the registration, it is the RPL target. In RTO, the prefix length was always there so there's really no difference in operation for 0 and 3. A legacy router uses 0 for a prefix as well as for an address, because it treats an address as just another prefix with a len of 128 for its routing purposes. For 6LoWPAN ND the concept of prefix length was not present so the prefix registration by a new node to a legacy 6LR would not result as expected. This is why the registration (EARO, EDAC) is rejected with a code 12.
makes sense? Pascal Le mar. 14 mai 2024 à 14:12, Luigi Iannone <g...@gigix.net> a écrit : > Hi Pascal, > > I have a small clarification question on this part: > > > > * When the value of 3 is received in an RTO (see Section 6.5), this > > value MUST be ignored by the receiver, meaning, treated as a value > > of 0, but the message is processed normally. > > > > What do you mean exactly by “processed normally”? > If 3 and 0 are treated in the same way does it mean I can register a > prefix using value 0 ? > Or does it mean that even receiving a prefix registration message from a > node supporting [I-D.ietf-6lo-prefix-registration] if the receiving node > does not support that specification the global effect will be the > registration of a unicast address (not a prefix)? > > Thanks > > Luigi > > > > -- Pascal
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list -- 6lo@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to 6lo-le...@ietf.org
