RE: [dhcwg] Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-scanning-implications

I fully agree with and support this text.

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Stig Venaas [mailto:stig.venaas@uninett.no] 
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 4:40 PM
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Review of draft-ietf-v6ops-scanning-implications

Per Fred's request, please let v6ops and/or authors know if you have
any thoughts regarding this draft. In particular there is the following
section:

4.2.  DHCP Service Configuration Options

    The administrator should configure DHCPv6 so that the first
addresses
    allocated from the pool begins much higher in the address space than
    at [prefix]::1.  DHCPv6 also includes an option to use Privacy
    Extension [2] addresses, i.e. temporary addresses, as described in
    Section 12 of the DHCPv6 [5] specification.  It is desirable that
    allocated addresses are not sequential, nor have any predictable
    pattern to them.

Stig

Fred Baker wrote:
> The v6ops working group is approaching a working group last call on  
> draft-ietf-v6ops-scanning-implications within the coming few weeks.
We 
> would appreciate a review from your working group of this document  
> before we do so. How that is done is up to you; you may designate one

> or more reviewers, or simply conduct the review on your mailing list,

> or whatever else suits you. But please respond to the authors copying

> v6ops within the coming four weeks if you would.
> 
> Thank you for your help in this.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg