Yes, that draft covers how to disable the assignment of an address in the 169.254.0.0/16 prefix. The ZeroConf WG has the current version of of a draft that describes how stateless autoconfiguration works and actually (re)specifies the prefix.
% % % Are you refering to RFC 2563 (DHCP Option to Disable Stateless % Auto-Configuration in IPv4 Clients) or something else? We are looking at % using this mechanism and if there are issues with it, I want to make sure I % understand them... % % % John % % % Bill Manning wrote: % > % > % % > % Sorry to barge in with a technical, standards-related question. It % > % seems that there is a common practice that when a host asks for an % > % IPv4 address, such as through DHCP, but the host isn't attached to % > % the network, that the software gives it an address of 169.254.x.y. Is % > % this documented in any RFC? Should it be? % > % % > % --Paul Hoffman, Director % > % --VPN Consortium % > % % > % > It was documented a year after its delegation in a now expired draft % > by Richard Troll. There is an RFC that describes problems with auto % > configuration using this prefix. There is also a current draft in/from % > zeroconf that talks about this prefix. I've had a draft that describes % > this prefix killed a couple of times by the IESG/IAB. % > The prefix was originally delegated after the LA IETF. You'll find a % > brief mention of the action on the last page fo the DHCP wg minutes. % > % > -- % > --bill % -- --bill
