I agree with Erik, SHOULD is premature until we clarify what the combination of M & A means (either with local pref, default address selection rules,...)
- Alain. > -----Original Message----- > From: Erik Nordmark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 10:19 AM > To: Thomas Narten > Cc: Durand, Alain; IPv6 Mailing List; Bob Hinden > Subject: Re: Proposed M&O bits text for RFC2461bis > > Thomas Narten wrote: > > > Per my comment above, if you don't invoke DHC, you won't > get all the > > addresses the network is configured to be giving you. Hence, you > > SHOULD invoke DHC to get them. > > I think making that a SHOULD is premature and too strong, > since we haven't explored what the desirable behaviors are > when both M and A bits are set. > (When M is set and no prefix has A, then using DHCP is a no-brainer.) > > I can imagine that a host wants to have the option to have > local policy to handle the case when both M and A bits are > set, but there is nothing in the "SHOULD" that allows for > local policy control. > > If we want to work out more details in this space, I suspect > we need to start with understanding why some operator would > set both M and A bits. > But I think we can defer that discussion until we have more > deployment experience. > > Erik > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
