Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:55:51 -0600
From: "Scott Langley" <slangley@tadboise.com>
Subject: [dhcptest:00165] Re: DHCPv6 Client Test 3315 #70
To: <dhcptest@tahi.org>
Message-Id: <04654E52DE5D8D47906217E3D32FA976073C57@sbserver.tadboise.com>
References: <04654E52DE5D8D47906217E3D32FA976073C55@sbserver.tadboise.com><0260031F55435342859BFB2CCA6773D81B898A23@EXCHANGE03.jp.ykgw.net> <20070326172248.33c011d9.Hideshi.Enokihara@jp.yokogawa.com>
X-Mail-Count: 00165

Hi Hideshi,Unfortunately, I didn't preserve the run of that test case I emailed you =about.  Sorry.When I ran the modified script you attached, I got a slightly different =result.  However, that may be due to the constantly changing builds on =my NUT device.Anyway, this time the test case passes with these values:       NUT      TN        |       |        |       |Initialize NUT(as a DHCPv6 client)        |       |        | ----> |Solicit        | <---- |Advertise        | ----> |Request        | <---- |Reply w/Status code/NotOnLink   /////////////////////              | ----> |Renew (still with the address specified in the IA_NA =option)        | ----> |Rebind   /////////////////////        | ----> |Solicit        It does send a Solicit at the end.  Should the test case fail because my =device first sent a Renew and a Rebind message before sending the =Solicit?  Or should it pass because it did the right thing in the end, =sending the Solicit?Thanks.Scott Langleyslangley@tadboise.com-----Original Message-----From: Hideshi Enokihara [mailto:Hideshi.Enokihara@jp.yokogawa.com]Sent: Mon 3/26/2007 2:22 AMTo: Scott LangleyCc: dhcptest@tahi.orgSubject: Re: [dhcptest:00163] Re: DHCPv6 Client Test 3315 #70 Hello again Scott,How about attached script?I have fixed the issue.Could you use this script instead of original script, please?Thanks,...HideshiOn Mon, 26 Mar 2007 14:41:57 +0900<Hideshi.Enokihara@jp.yokogawa.com> wrote:> Hello Scott,> > Thankyou for your report.>  > >The reason it shouldn't have passed was that the Client's REPLY =message> still specified an address in its IA_NA option when the test case says> it shouldn't do so after receiving a NotOnLink from the server.> > "Client's REPLY message"should be "Client's Request message", right?> > Anyway, I couldn't understand the reason why the issue occurred.> Could you send us (dhcptest@thai.org or contact@tahi.org) the> Logs(70.html and 70.html.Link0.dump)> > Best regards,> ...Hideshi> ________________________________> > 	From: Scott Langley [mailto:slangley@tadboise.com] > 	Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 4:18 AM> 	To: dhcptest@tahi.org> 	Subject: [dhcptest:00162] DHCPv6 Client Test 3315 #70> 	> 	> > 	Here's a bit of feedback ...> 	> 	With the Release-1.0.0B1 of DHCPv6 Test Suite, I got a pass on> test #70 of section 3315 when I should not have.> 	> 	#70 Part C: Reply message contains NotOnLink in response to a> Request message.> 	> 	The reason it shouldn't have passed was that the Client's REPLY> message still specified an address in its IA_NA option when the test> case says it shouldn't do so after receiving a NotOnLink from the> server.> 	> 	Regards,> 	> 	Scott Langley> 	slangley@tadboise.com> 	> 	> 	> > > -- *************************************Hideshi EnokiharaIPv6 BusinessNetwork & Software Development Dept.Yokogawa Electric Corporation
	

165_2.html (attatchment)(tag is disabled)