> Proposed resolution: write "MAY be disabled" instead. Um, I'd suggest that this by itself isn't really all that helpful. It might help to add some more explanatary text together with recommendations on what to do. E.g.,
- should an implementation just configure the address and use it anyway? (I doubt this, as this implies we should just punt on DAD) - Assume there is a DOS attack, wait a while, and try again? (hoping the bad guy goes away in the meantime) - generate a new IID and try again? And if so, are there recommendations on what kind of ID? And if there is a DOS attack in progress, why would trying *any* address result in success? - Try generating a new address, but use exponential backoff in delaying after each failed attempt? - something else? (or some combination of the above?) Thomas -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
