Re: [Autoconf] Closing summary on consensus-call for RFC5889modifications

"Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net> Fri, 27 August 2010 18:41 UTC

Return-Path: <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F21493A6A47 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Du5-Ah3EDxRS for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAE283A69E9 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=uCYtUvWCwMa1s6rbqJ9n86mufbdFFjxn4g1+Wqo7WaWfKrG4eJxkbgnKbEKDk8Jf; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [207.74.239.6] (helo=[10.150.0.248]) by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>) id 1Op3s5-0007CY-O4; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:41:49 -0400
Message-ID: <4C7806EC.6000607@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:41:48 -0700
From: "Charles E. Perkins" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
Organization: Wichorus Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Dearlove, Christopher \(UK\)" <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com>
References: <AANLkTi=MZORvNSW7wHdHYOzkOwNZojBars26GfSPgWc9@mail.gmail.com> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D035CA5CE@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET> <4C741EBB.8060909@earthlink.net> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D03609170@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET> <4C75308C.1090506@earthlink.net> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D036094AB@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET> <4C767360.7050805@earthlink.net> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D03609914@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET> <4C773080.8010601@earthlink.net> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D03609AE8@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET> <4C77A17A.1090708@earthlink.net> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D03609C8A@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET>
In-Reply-To: <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D03609C8A@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 137d7d78656ed6919973fd6a8f21c4f2d780f4a490ca6956abb457f1b4332f52ad4c17d28a2777d3424f8f076e1a37ee350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 207.74.239.6
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Closing summary on consensus-call for RFC5889modifications
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 18:41:19 -0000

Hello Chris,

On 8/27/2010 5:27 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
> There's a key question as to how much functionality.

This is an important point.  The functionality needed by
a host in order to connect to network depends on the
functionality provided by the router that offers the
netwok prefix.

> If a node just has a single point of attachment to an unchanging
> router, then router prefix autoconf is sufficient, as the host
> node can just get an address from its router. If we extend that
> so that it can now move, and use Mobile IP with its home location
> being the router it first attached to, ditto.

Check.

> The question is what is the case where the host node is doing
> something useful, but can't just get an address delegated to
> it by an autoconfed router?
>
> (I am not saying I don't think there is such a case. I'm just
> saying I haven't seen it - quite a different thing.)

Well, there are such cases, and they should be allowed.

Regards,
Charlie P.