> I support Christian's suggestion; they should be just hints. I also support this suggestion.
> No flag is going to force the node to run a protocol. More often than > not, for implementation simplicity, I'd guess most nodes (especially > where DHCPv6 is available), the nodes are going to run DHCPv6(-lite) > in any case, whether they saw a flag or not. Your first statement is correct, but I think that it is important to stress that the M/O bits should not be seen as trivial or unimportant because they have no mandatory implications. Even if they're "only" hints, they're quite useful in some scenarios. Next to the protocol authority, there's the administrative authority. It's not the node that choses whether or not it's going to run a protocol in this particular case. It's the administrator who puts a DHCPv6 client onto the machine that respects the M/O bits or not and who decides if he wants to set certain M/O bit combinations in his site for one reason or the other (think WiFi spots with SAA and stateless DHCPv6, think cluster nodes without any SAA and with stateful DHCPv6 for full control and think about machines that need to detect whether or not they need to use SAA or stateful methods depending on their location (portable nodes)). So, you get a consistent behaviour since it's the administrator who decides about the usefulness of utilising the M/O bits (client side and "RA emitter" side). Christian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
