I'm afraid if we use "SHOULD", CPE vendors will follow the path so far
followed, which is not building that option into their product.
I'd rather see a "MUST" to the automatic update functionality, but a
"SHOULD" in regards whether it's turned on by default or not.
Frank
-Original Message---
I like it. As Gert already said, it speaks to both views.
-Original Message-
From: v6ops-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred
Baker
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:40 PM
To: Operations; IESG IESG
Cc: i...@core3.amsl.com
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Fwd: I-D Action:
Hi Fred,
I'm ok with it.
Regards,
Mark.
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:40:07 -0700
Fred Baker wrote:
>
> On Oct 15, 2010, at 3:40 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
> >> I'd think that recommending having an option that disables unattended
> >> automatic update would address this concern. Managed ser
Works for me too.
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 2010-10-20 07:40, Fred Baker wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2010, at 3:40 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>>> I'd think that recommending having an option that disables unattended
>>> automatic update would address this concern. Managed service providers,
>
It's fine.
Barbara
> -Original Message-
> From: v6ops-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of steve.dot...@cox.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 4:01 PM
> To: f...@cisco.com; v6...@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org
> Cc: i...@core3.amsl.com
> Subject: Re: [v6ops]Fwd: I-D
Me too
> -Original Message-
> From: v6ops-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Gert Doering
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:17 PM
> To: Fred Baker
> Cc: Operations; IESG IESG; i...@core3.amsl.com
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] Fwd: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-sim
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:40:07AM -0700, Fred Baker wrote:
> /*
> * suggestion
> */
> REC-13:
> Residential Internet Gateways SHOULD provide a convenient means to securely
> update their firmware, for the installation of security patches and other
> manufacturer-recommended changes.
>
>
On Oct 15, 2010, at 3:40 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> I'd think that recommending having an option that disables unattended
>> automatic update would address this concern. Managed service providers,
>> since they'd be controlling the CPE, could go in and disable unattended
>> automatic upd
On Sep 22, 2010, at 02:24, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Rémi Després wrote:
>>
>> Of course, if MS and Apple announce an upgrade of all their IPv6 stacks, to
>> the effect that they use DHCPv6 requests to obtain what they no longer get
>> in RAs, that would mitigate the need
