IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-01.txt

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Sun, 16 July 2017 12:14 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25F5713178E for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 05:14:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Hw-pEYveApVU for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 05:14:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71ADA130889 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Jul 2017 05:14:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: ipv6@ietf.org
Received: from crumpet.local (089-101-070074.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.74] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v6GCE39f055969 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 16 Jul 2017 13:14:03 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.ibn.ie: Host 089-101-070074.ntlworld.ie [89.101.70.74] (may be forged) claimed to be crumpet.local
Message-ID: <596B588A.2010701@foobar.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 13:14:02 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Postbox 5.0.15 (Macintosh/20170609)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
CC: IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-01.txt
References: <149909644776.22718.16227939850699261560@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKD1Yr25jk22qTTqJ-RoxOVTu7=e=vQWWLQZnek-HGCKaZgU=w@mail.gmail.com> <596B4BE1.7020807@foobar.org> <CAKD1Yr1W0+d-Bj9daqXUsyAEaNE6RHHZBwJ_6SzT0sGhZXdDMw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr1W0+d-Bj9daqXUsyAEaNE6RHHZBwJ_6SzT0sGhZXdDMw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/48P-IW38tHvpgfrZfhRrpEn7tho>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 12:14:11 -0000

Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> That's a fair opinion to hold, but the fact of the matter is that a
> SHOULD for DHCPv6 conflicts with RFC 7934 and RFC 7844.

"The fact of the matter"? :-)

There is no conflict here.

The "SHOULD" that you quoted in rfc7934 refers to how an opinion about
people ought to run their networks, but does not conflict with the
SHOULD in 6434bis, which refers to what the IETF is proposing ought to
be supported on host devices.  These two things are very different indeed.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email