Ralph,

I don't think that this was discussed completely last IETF.  I was wondering
if you could suggest some text for the current Node Requirements doc?

thanks,
John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Ralph Droms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 21 November, 2002 14:56
> To: Greg Daley; Loughney John (NRC/Helsinki)
> Cc: Bound, Jim; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-01.txt
> 
> 
> There may be some additional discussion about the 'M' and 'O' 
> bits during 
> my slot in the ipv6 WG meeting Thu AM.
> 
> - Ralph
> 
> At 12:09 PM 11/21/2002 +0000, Greg Daley wrote:
> 
> >Hi Jim,
> >
> >I find it hard to tell if you mean it is wrong (incorrect) or
> >wrong (not the right way to go).
> >
> >about the current status though,
> >
> >section 5.4.5 of RFC 2462 mentions that a node which receives the
> >M flag goes should undertake stateful address configuration.
> >there is no MUST requirement in that section, though section 5.5
> >does say
> >
> >"the processing described below MUST be enabled by default"
> >
> >If the intention was that nodes which have DHCP/managed capability
> >support this when the M flag is set, it's unclear. At the moment,
> >it looks optional to implementors.
> >
> >Does it require update? Comments?
> >
> >Greg
> >
> >
> >"Bound, Jim" wrote:
> > >
> > > Today in v6ops I think I heard that compliance to the ND 
> M bit being set
> > > is optional.  That I think is wrong.  But the node reqs 
> doc states that
> > > dhcpv6 is unconditionally optional which is probably 
> correct because
> > > stateful may not imply dhcpv6 today.  But if the M bit is 
> set the host
> > > node (non router) must look for a stateful node.  We need 
> to get this
> > > right.
> > >
> > > P.S. John - I will have all my input on this to you in 
> the next few
> > > weeks.  But it looks real good. I like the terminology too.
> > >
> > > Regards.
> > >
> > > /jim
> > > [Honor, Commitment, Integrity]
> > >
> > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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 PROTECTED]
> > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >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 PROTECTED]
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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 PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to