Subject: [netlmm] IPv6 Link Local address for IPv4 only MN

From: Julien Laganier <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:54:25 +0100

Sri and Ryuji,

Does it make sense to relax the presence requirements for the IPv6 
Link-Local address from 5213 when the MN will only be provided with 
IPv4?

--julien
_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netlmm

---

From: Sri Gundavelli <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:32:53 -0800 (PST)

Hi Julien,

The link-local address option presence requirement is optional
even in 5213. When there is only IPv4 address assignment, the
issue of link-local address collision or the need to avoid such
collision on the MN-AR link is not a protocol issue as there is
no IPv6 mobility session. So, its not required when there is
IPv4-only session.

Regards
Sri