I think the O flag (if we keep it!) should simply specify DHCPv6, with no implication about the way in which DHCPv6 is used.
"Stateless DHCPv6" is simply a way to use some of the messages from the full specification in RFC 3315. RFC 3376 is a guideline to the implementation of DHCPv6 that uses just Information-request/Reply messages. A client can choose to use the Request/Reply or the Information-request/Reply message exchange to obtain other configuration information without address assignment.
- Ralph
At 01:28 PM 4/28/2004 +0100, Tim Chown wrote:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 07:28:39PM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote: > > My point in this message is that IMO we should specify the protocols > corresponding to these flags clearly and concretely, without leaving > any ambiguity (I've changed the subject accordingly.) That is, I > strongly believe we should clearly say in rfc2462bis, *for example*, > > - the protocol that should be invoked by the M flag is DHCPv6 > (RFC3315), and nothing else > - the protocol that should be invoked by the O flag is stateless > DHCPv6 (RFC3736), and nothing else
But in reality nodes will have full DHCPv6 client support in them (3315) whether or not they then see the M or O flag that is what they will use?
All the DHCPv6 servers implemented to date, to my knowledge, are 3315 and not the 3736 subset.
So it is better to just say O flag is other (non address) configuration data, regardless of full/subset of DHCPv6 used?
Tim
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
