Gray, Eric writes: > --> The question is not to get an absolutely stable address, > --> but to make sure that in case multiple addresses are defined, > --> the one with the highest likelyhood of stability is selected. > > When you say "highest likelihood of stability" - is what > you really mean "stability is under the control of the entity > who most feels the consequences of instability"? > > It seems debatable (to me) that an assigned address might > change many times more often than a derived address, but (it also > seems to me) the entity that controls assignment is also the one > that has to deal with the consequences...
That seems to me to be a mostly fair analysis of the issue. If you wanted to avoid the words "highest likelihood of stability" for the case of DHCPv6 alone, I think you might express it as "least number of bits specified by the client alone." Stability is still (to me) an important issue, as it distinguishes more broadly across manually-configured as well as temporary addresses. -- James Carlson, KISS Network <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
