Archive

In favour. I commented on earlier revisions.

Comments for future revisions:

- First, I think it would be better protocol design to make 
OPTION_HOST_CONNECTIVITY contain a bit field, where IPv4 and IPv6 would 
be represented by bits that could be toggled independently. Other bits 
would be reserved for future use.

- Second, is it necessary for the relay to track and report 
*transitions*? Isn't it better to make the relay report the current 
state only, and let the DHCP server figure out the transition based on 
the previous state?

- Third, if we keep working with transitions, what is the initial state 
of a new host? If I plug in a host and it sends an RA, does it go from 
"no stack" to "IPv6-only"? Reporting the current state would deal with 
this easily, whereas reporting transitions would require a new set of 
messages I suppose.

Simon

Le 2014-01-13 10:12, Bernie Volz (volz) a écrit :
> Hi all:
>
> A call for adoption is being initiated at the request of the authors to
> determine whether there is WG consensus to adopt
> draft-wing-dhc-dns-reconfigure-02 as a DHC WG item. Please state whether
> or not you're in favor of the adoption by replying to this mail. If you
> are not in favor, please also state your objections in your response.
> This adoption call will complete on January  27, 2014.
>
> The HTML version of the document can be viewed at
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wing-dhc-dns-reconfigure-02.
>
> If there is consensus to adopt as a WG document, we will confirm with
> Ted to get it on the charter.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tomek & Bernie
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>

-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca

Re: [dhcwg] WG Adoption Call - draft-wing-dhc-dns-reconfigure-02 - respond by Jan 27, 2014