>>>>> On Tue, 18 May 2004 09:09:16 +0200,
>>>>> "Christian Strauf (JOIN)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> - how a host that implements DHCPv6 should behave. The host would
>> have an internal (conceptual) variable, controlling the policy about
>> autoconfiguration, which should have at least three values:
>> 1: it should invoke DHCPv6 for address autoconfiguration regardless
>> of the content of receiving RAs or the existence of RAs
>> 2: it should invoke DHCPv6 for address autoconfiguration if and only
>> if it sees an RA changing the M bit from unset to set
>> 3: it should not invoke DHCPv6 for address autoconfiguration
>> regardless of the content of receiving RAs or the existence of
>> RAs
>> - same thing for a host that implements the "stateless" subset of
>> DHCPv6 (RFC3736) for other configuration information.
> This might be tricky to implement. A potential problem would be how to
> get the M information that arrives in the kernel space to a program like
> DHCPv6 that runs in the user space (on many operating systems).
Let me check...this should apply to the current RFC2462, shouldn't it?
I'm not sure why you are making this point in this context...
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
