<greg.ra...@ins.com> writes: > Thomas,
> > raises an intersting point. This document (and RFC 4294) mandate > > (MUST) that hosts implement stateless autoconfiguration. This > > despite that this document is only informational, and no where in > > standards track RFCs is stateless autoconf mandated. This takes us > How about RFC 2462? Standards Track - IPv6 Stateless Address > Autoconfiguration. My point is that nowhere in 2462 (or any other standards track RFC) is it mandated that a host MUST implement 2462. 2462 (like most IETF standards) is completely optional to implement. The Node Requirements RFC arguably does not have authority to make 2462 mandatory to implement. At least, not while it is an informational document and says: > 2. Introduction > > The goal of this document is to define the common functionality > required from both IPv6 hosts and routers. Many IPv6 nodes will > implement optional or additional features, but this document > summarizes requirements from other published Standards Track > documents in one place. How's this to drive the point home further... 2461 (Neighbor Discovery) is NOT mandated. It is only listed as a SHOULD. (This is because some link layers might not need all parts of ND. But this has turned out to be bizarre because the important LLs do require ND, so it effectively is a requirement.) Of course, 2462 is widely implemented, and I'd strongly recommend that devices should implement it (though I can think of some exceptions). But we do have a fundmanental question about whether the IPv6 Node Requirements document can make new requirements that are not already in place in existing standards track documents. Thomas -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
