Le 01/08/2012 13:35, Liubing (Leo) a écrit :
Hi, all
Firstly, thanks for Karl's elaborate analysis and solution proposal
for the M/O issue. I think that's definitely reasonable reference if
we want to fix the issue.
But as some comments showed in this morning's 6man meeting, some
people thought it is not necessary to fix the M/O issue in standard,
because it used to be long discussions about it, and current SLAAC
standard (RFC4862) was just based on the discussion result at that
time. May I venture to argue that, "had been discussed before" might
not be reasonable enough to deal with current problems. I think the
situation has changed since the RFC4862 published, more and more
real IPv6 deployments are emerging, then people find it is quite
confusing of the ambiguous M/O definition, this real-network problem
may be much more sensitive than we imagined/discussed to be when
writing RFC4862.
We have two address autoconfiguration modes (SLAAC/DHCPv6) in IPv6,
which is one of the most significant differences between IPv4,
people who have really deployed IPv6 may notice more importance of
SLAAC/DHCPv6 interaction than we discussed before, at least I've
learned the requirements from both offline and on the mics, maybe it
is not comprehensive enough, but at least it's considerable.
So, my personal preference is similar with Karl's, we might need
additional flags to cover the SLAAC/DHCPv6 interaction semantics.
And in 6renum, we also discussed some new semantics requirements (see
in the draft, and the section 5.1 in 6renum WG item:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-02 ), I
think they are also considerable.
I will not oppose any initiative to improve the ambiguous situation of
the M/O flags.
The choice today is more than b/w 'if M then DHCP is available otherwise
SLAAC'. Both DHCP and SLAAC advanced towards doing what the other does,
and it is _still_ possible to need some features from one and some from
the other - it's still impossible to use just one for everything. (eg
RA doesnt PD, DHCP doesnt MTU, and more)
A more complete M/O set of flags would be something like telling "use
DHCP for PD and use SLAAC for default route" or so.
But not sure whether this is the right thing to do either.
Alex
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
