Thomas,
Hmm. I'd argue that moving and sleeping/waking nodes is perhaps more the
norm than exception today. At the very least, I'd again use the MAY
keyword for this specification. The above sounds almost like
recommending to not implement it.
Just how much time does 4429 shave of the restarting of a device? not
much I think. Couple of seconds? In reality, devices that are
sleeping/waking take more than that to restore their state ...
Speak for your own devices :-) Seriously though, you are right of course
that this may not be a big factor. That being said, button press -
Internet is usable time is a significant usability factor in many
devices. And on low-powered nodes the time spent having to wait before
the device can go to sleep again can easily increase battery usage
significantly. So I wouldn't rule out that its a significant issue in
some cases.
Also, just who has implemented 4429? Do we actually have real
experience with it?
Not much if any experience -- agreed. I thought there was at least one
implementation. But I guess we are having a philosophical discussion of
what it takes to make a spec get a MAY in this document. I definitely
agree that MUST or SHOULD is out of question. I think it would be fair
to list the implementation and deployment experience in the draft, which
you do for many specifications. This is the interesting information for
the reader, and they can draw their own conclusions. But I also think
that extensions in standards track RFCs deserve to be clearly marked as
potential specifications to implement.
(And based on my own experience of running non-IPv4 networks that
desperately need DNS discovery, somewhere in Section 7 I think you
should require that routers with attached hosts actually support both
(stateless) DHCP and RA-based DNS discovery.)
The trouble with routers being required to implement stateless is that
they don't need to. You can have one DHC server for an entire site,
with relay agents relaying packets to it...
Ok. Well, require a relay agent or a server then?
Jari
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
