Dear authors,

        Very interesting document and very valuable to document the current
behavior of the A, M and O flags (that have caused some headaches to
some including myself when troubleshooting IPv6).

        I see that has been submitted as "Proposed Standard" but I failed to
find what you are proposing.

        Would it better to be submitted as "Informational" and then look how to
indicate the correct behavior of the flags? or just as "Informational"?

Regards.
as
        

On 26/02/2013 15:14, Liubing (Leo) wrote:
> Hi, 6man & v6ops
> 
> We submitted a new draft to discuss the SLAAC/DHCPv6 interaction gaps.
> 
> As we know there are several flags in RA messages regarding with the host 
> configuration behavior, which are A (Autonomous) flag, M (Managed) flag, and 
> O (Otherconfig) flag.
> For some reason, the host behavior of interpreting the flags is ambiguous in 
> the standard (mainly RFC4862). I presented a draft discussing M flag behavior 
> in 6man @ietf84, and there were some feedbacks arguing the same issue. This 
> draft analyzed all the three flags, and provided test result of current 
> implementations, it showed the behavior of different mainstream desktop OSes 
> have varied. The ambiguous and variation might cause operational problems, 
> such as renumbering (used to discuss in 6renum WG and been documented in the 
> WG drafts), cold start problem, and management gaps .etc.
> 
> Your review and comments would be appreciated very much. 
> 
> All the best,
> Bing
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org]
>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 5:52 PM
>> To: Liubing (Leo)
>> Cc: rbon...@juniper.net
>> Subject: New Version Notification for
>> draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt
>>
>>
>> A new version of I-D, draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt
>> has been successfully submitted by Bing Liu and posted to the
>> IETF repository.
>>
>> Filename:     draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
>> Revision:     01
>> Title:                DHCPv6/SLAAC Address Configuration Interaction Problem
>> Statement
>> Creation date:        2013-02-25
>> Group:                Individual Submission
>> Number of pages: 12
>> URL:
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-
>> 01.txt
>> Status:
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
>> Htmlized:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01
>> Diff:
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    This document analyzes the host behavior of DHCPv6/SLAAC interaction
>>    issue. It reviews the standard definition of the host behaviors and
>>    provides the test results of current mainstream implementations. Some
>>    potential operational gaps of the interaction are also described.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The IETF Secretariat
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to