>>>> I'm sorry, but I don't get it. Are you
saying that the Alternate Care-of
>>>> Address sub-option is not included in
Binding Updates sent to the CN?
>>> ??
>>>
>>> RFC3775 said ACoA is required only for home
registration.
>> 9. Correspondent Node Operation
>> 9.5.1. Receiving Binding Updates
>>
>> The specified care-of address MUST be
determined as follows:
>>
>> o If the Alternate Care-of Address option is
present, the care-of
>> address is the address in that option.
>>
>> o Otherwise, the care-of address is the Source
Address field in the
>> packet's IPv6 header.
>>
>> What does this mean?
>
> You can set an ACoA option in the BU for CN, but not
MUST.
True, but I think I have not said that it is a MUST, I'm
just saying
that it might be included. I believe that is exactly what
the following
says:
"the Care-of Address is taken from the Alternate
Care-of Address
sub-option. If the Alternate Care-of Address sub-option is
not present,
the Care-of Address must be taken from the Source Address
field of the
IPv6 header."
i.e. use the Alternate Care-of Address option if present,
otherwise use
the Source Address field.
However, I believe we both are now pretty much on the same
"frequency".
If you get my meaning 
/Tero
_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
Monami6 ietf.org
https:
//www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
|