Overall your proposal is good.
> - remove "requirement" sentences like the following one
> If the value of ManagedFlag changes from FALSE to TRUE,
> and the host is not already running the stateful address
> autoconfiguration protocol, the host should invoke the stateful
> address autoconfiguration protocol, requesting both address
> information and other information.
> (Section 5.5.3 of RFC2462)
I think I'm suggesting the same thing as Tim.
Loosing the above setence means that implementations might not
look for changes in the flag value (but perhaps instead only look
at the flag in the first RA).
So saying something like
Hosts which invoke DHCPv6 based on the ManagedFlag need to
not only look for this flag when booting, but also observe whether
the ManagedFlag changes from FALSE to TRUE in a subsequent Router
Advertisement.
> > - remove Section 5.5.2 of RFC2462 (that mandates performing the
> > "stateful" protocol when no RAs)
Restating that to not be a requirement also makes sense.
I think the section should become more of a note which points out
that in the absense of any routers hence router advertisements,
stateless address autoconfiguration isn't available
and that a host MAY wish to use DHCPv6 in this case.
It would presumably make sense to clarify in that section that even
if this is done the host continues to operate the stateless protocol
i.e. the reception of a router advertisement (with A-flag in one
or more prefix option) in the future will trigger stateless.
This is to make it more clear that the absense of a router while
booting must not automatically "turn off" the stateless protocol.
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
