>>>>> On Tue, 24 May 2005 10:45:19 -0400,
>>>>> Thomas Narten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Does the community feel that operators need RA bits that
> control/indicate whether a client is to invoke DHC? That is, is there
> a need for the sys admin to signal to client whether DHC is to be
> invoked?
In my understanding of the past discussion (mainly for rfc2462bis),
the "community" felt that operators need RA bits that control indicate
whether a client "can" invoke DHC. The nuance might be slightly
different from "is to" invoke DHC, but I think in general the answer
was YES. And I don't think recent discussions change the base sense
at that time.
> Second, is it important that such a signal be honored by clients?
> (That is, if clients end up mostly ignoring the flags, does their
> presence become useless?)
> For example, should the sys admin be able to say "do not run DHC,
> doing so wastes local resources and won't get you any config info"?
> (And should that be honored by clients?)
Perhaps depending on the meaning of "honored", but it seems some
people who have mobility background think YES, in that it is important
to provide a way of signaling "do not run DHC" (when it's not
available) for saving batteries (and perhaps network bandwidth).
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
