Re: [dhcwg] dhcpv6-24: movement detection and Confirm message

> Hmm. If this message is OPTIONAL to implement, this needs to be made
> clear in the spec. I assumed it was mandatory. I think it should be
> mandatory. If it is not, there is little point in clients implementing
> it. I.e., it doesn't make sense for clients to implement basic
> features that servers aren't required to implement. This leads to bad
> interoperability.

This is a case where the market will quickly punish servers that don't 
implement it that should.   We aren't even insisting that address 
allocation is mandatory, AFAIK, so saying that confirm is mandatory seems 
inconsistent.   That is, it is fine to implement a DHCPv6 server that only 
responds to information requests and that does not allocate IP addresses.   
A DHCP server configured to just provide information might not even have 
enough information to determine whether or not a client is on the link on 
which its addresses are valid.

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