On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 07:59:00AM -0400, Bound, Jim wrote: > The key is the ongoing debate of stateless vs stateful and members > working their agendas for their products. The bottom line is the users > will use stateful and stateless and we need a way to permit that and > also inform implementors that both stateful and stateless are required > for clients. That is the bottom line. How we say it seems to be still > a debate. > /jim
I agree with this. I have one concern though. There must be a way to support different types of clients. On a link there may be both full fledged DHCP clients that needs to receive IPv6 addresses with DHCP, and some other DHCP clients that can only do stateless (or need only stateless). In the latter case the clients may have manually configured IPv6 addresses, or use IPv4 or whatever. In that case, there must be a way to tell the full fledged clients that they should use DHCP to configure addresses, while at the same time allow some DHCP clients to use stateless. If you say all clients MUST do stateful or all clients MUST do stateful... I believe there must be a way for an administrator to allow the scenario I describe above. I'll try to stay away from this thread now, Stig -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
