Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 07:18:41 -0700
From: "Leino, Tammy" <tammy_leino@mentor.com>
Subject: [users:00437] Re: Release 1.5.0b1 Phase-2 ND - Test #167 Host Test
To: <users@tahi.org>
Message-Id: <2F83EB16CD718C43889CBCD31ECFD7F81B87DB@na2-mail.mgc.mentorg.com>
In-Reply-To: <2F83EB16CD718C43889CBCD31ECFD7F81B8794@na2-mail.mgc.mentorg.com>
X-Mail-Count: 00437

Hello All, I reported this issue last Thursday and have not yet heard back from =anyone.  Do you require further clarification on any points?  If so, =please let me know. Best Regards,Tammy Leino-----Original Message-----From: Leino, Tammy Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 4:35 PMTo: users@tahi.orgSubject: [users:00425] Release 1.5.0b1 Phase-2 ND - Test #167 Host TestHello All, I have encountered a bug in the latest version of the test suite, with =test #167 when running in host mode. RFC 2462 states:        If the sum of the prefix length and interface identifier length       does not equal 128 bits, the Prefix Information option MUST be       ignored. This test is advertising a prefix length of 96 in the second RA and =expecting the NUT to add the prefix to its list of on-link prefixes, =although 96 plus the length of the Ethernet interface ID is longer than =128.  From the RFC explanation, I believe this test is operating =incorrectly.Also, the test procedure documentation does not accurately describe what =is actually happening in the test.  The procedure shows just one RA =being sent, but in the test, two RAs are sent, each with a different =prefix option.Please advise in this matter. Best Regards,Tammy Leino 
	

437_2.html (attatchment)(tag is disabled)