Subject: Address config (was: Node Req: Issue31: DHCPv6 text)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:33:46 +0200

Hi all,

Just popping up a level.  It seems that for address configuration, we have 3 options:

1) Manual config
2) Autoconfig
3) DHCPv6

My reading of the specs are that Nodes must support (i.e. - implement) Manual Config &
Autoconfig & may implement DHCPv6. 

I don't think that the Node Requirements can specify what a Node MUST do in order
to perform address config, but it can say what a node should do when it gets a
Router Advertisement with the M or O bit set.

If the WG agrees, I will try to create the appropriate text.

If the WG feels that a node's behavior needs to be specified, than I feel it should
be done else where.  If text is needed on how to resolve conflicts with address 
asignment, I feel that should be done elsewhere (however, I feel that it is more
likely OS or node dependent behavior).

thanks,
John

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:06:02 +0000

> Router Advertisement with the M or O bit set.

I think the nodes requirement text should simply not change the wording used
in the existing RFCs.   So if 2462 says "should" then this text should use
"should" as well.   Unless we know 100% we will revise the RFC.   This document
is supposed to be a summary, not changing existing new/conflicting standards.

Tim