Hi Thomas,
On Thu, 12 May 2011 09:23:20 -0400 Thomas Narten <nar...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Ole, > > Getting back to some of your other points... > > Ole Troan <otr...@employees.org> writes: > > >> * RFC2675: I would just remove that. > > > > > However, I do not see evidence that the WG has changed its thinking > and would now be willing to make implementation of DHCP a SHOULD. > I think it would be reasonable to make DHCP a SHOULD, however I've thought that one of the reasons SLAAC exists is to provide simpler and lighter weight address configuration method for resource constrained end-nodes such as embedded ones. So perhaps it could be worth mentioning that an example of an exception to the SHOULD would be those types of end-nodes. Regards, Mark. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
