Subject: RE: Stateful Address Config - I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-00.txt

From: "Adam Machalek" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 08:15:01 -0500

John,

I was hoping for something a little more specific, helping to clear up just
what an implementation needs in order to be conformant.  How does something
like the following sound?

4.4.5 Stateful Address Autoconfiguration

Stateful Address Autoconfiguration is conditionally mandatory.  For those
IPv6 Nodes that implement a stateful configuration mechanism such as
[DHCPv6], those nodes SHOULD/MUST initiatiate stateful address
autoconfiguration upon the reciept of a Router Advertisement with the
Managed address flag set.  In addition, as defined in [RFC2462], in the
absence of a router, hosts that implement a stateful configuration
mechanism such as [DHCPv6] MUST attempt to use stateful address
autoconfiguration.

For IPv6 Nodes that do not implement the optional stateful configuration
mechanisms such as [DHCPv6], the Managed Address flag of a Router
Advertisement can be ignored.  Furthermore, in the absensce of a router,
this type of node is not required to initiate stateful address
autoconfiguration as specified in [RFC2462].

Adam Machalek

                      <john.loughney@no                                                                                              
                      kia.com>                 To:       <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>                        
                                               cc:                                                                                   
                      06/28/2002 05:54         Subject:  RE: Stateful Address Config -  I-D                                          
                      AM                        ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-00.txt                                      

Hi  Adam,

Very  good point.  I have added the following text:

4.5.5  Stateful Address Autoconfiguration

IPv6  Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC2462] defines stateless
address  autoconfiguation.  However, it does  state that in the absence of
routers, hosts must perform host MUST attempt to  use stateful
autoconfiguration.  There is also reference to stateful  address
autoconfiguration being defined elsewhere. Additionally, DHCP [DHCP]
states that it is on option for stateful address autoconfiguation.

From  the current set of specification, it is not clear the level of
support that is  needed for statefull Address Autoconfiguration.

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Adam Machalek  [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: 21 June, 2002  18:52
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Stateful  Address Config - I-D
ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-00.txt

John,

Section 5.4 on DHCPv6 states that DHCPv6 is unconditionally optional,
which today implicitly makes Stateful Address config optional.

However, I'd like to see some direct  clarification in this document on
Stateful Address config, probably directly  after Section 4.5.2 discussing
Stateless Address config.

RFC2462 has some ambiguities, in  particular, it states "a managed address
configuration flag indicates whether  hosts should use stateful
autoconfiguration", not SHOULD.   Later in 2462  in section 5.2 it
continues this ambiguity by never explicitly using  MAY/SHOULD/MUST
anywhere.

Still  later in section RFC2462 5.5.2 Absence of Router Advertisements, it
finally  states that in the absence of a router, a host MUST attempt to use
stateful  autoconfiguration.

And lastly, the  DHCPv6 draft states "DHCP is one vehicle to perform
stateful  autoconfiguration", implying that there may be others.

So in the end, even with DHCPv6 optional, this doesn't  clarify exactly
what a host should do about Stateful Address  autoconfiguration.

Adam  Machalek

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 11:20:20 +0300

Hi Adam,

Thanks for the text, unfortunately, I received this mail after
I sent out the update.

It seems that you are suggesting Stateful Address Config is 
conditionally mandatory, and I think that I can agree with that.

John

>                       kia.com>                 To:       
> <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>          
>               
>                                                cc:            
>                                                               
         
>                       AM