On May 13, 2011, at 12:02 PM 5/13/11, Thomas Narten wrote: > Bob, > > Bob Hinden <bob.hin...@gmail.com> writes: > >> While I support changing the requirement to a SHOULD, I would prefer >> the text to be something like: > >> <t> DHCPv6 <xref target='RFC3315' /> can be used to obtain and >> configure addresses. In general, a network may provide for the >> configuration of addresses through Router Advertisements, >> DHCPv6 or both. There will be a wide range of IPv6 deployment models >> and differences in address assignment requirements. Consequently all >> hosts >> SHOULD implement address configuration via DHCP.</t> > >> It's not just about what some operators may or may not do. For >> example enterprises, governments, etc. will also have specific >> requirements. > > I like this text better than what I proposed as well.
Here's my contribution, trying to make an explicit link between the last two sentences: <t> DHCPv6 <xref target='RFC3315' /> can be used to obtain and configure addresses. In general, a network may provide for the configuration of addresses through Router Advertisements, DHCPv6 or both. There will be a wide range of IPv6 deployment models and differences in address assignment requirements, some of which may require DHCPv6 for address assignment. Consequently all hosts SHOULD implement address configuration via DHCPv6.</t> > > Thanks, > Thomas > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------