IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD

Mark Smith <ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org> Tue, 24 May 2011 21:16 UTC

Return-Path: <ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.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 928B0E07A6 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2011 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.986
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.986 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.091, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AU=0.377, HOST_EQ_AU=0.327]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w7FkM+nuUPW4 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 May 2011 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp3.adam.net.au (smtp3.adam.net.au [202.136.110.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10483E0786 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 May 2011 14:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 219-90-253-138.ip.adam.com.au ([219.90.253.138] helo=opy.nosense.org) by smtp3.adam.net.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org>) id 1QOyxn-0004V2-GS; Wed, 25 May 2011 06:46:27 +0930
Received: from opy.nosense.org (localhost.localdomain [IPv6:::1]) by opy.nosense.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 404483B338; Wed, 25 May 2011 06:46:27 +0930 (CST)
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 06:46:27 +0930
From: Mark Smith <ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org>
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Subject: Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD
Message-ID: <20110525064627.7f1f7746@opy.nosense.org>
In-Reply-To: <E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A65C6A6C9547@XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <C9F53B85.11BE93%john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com> <201105232010.p4NKAV9X012654@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <E1829B60731D1740BB7A0626B4FAF0A65C6A6C9547@XCH-NW-01V.nw.nos.boeing.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.24.4; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
X-Location: Lower Mitcham, South Australia, 5062
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 24 May 2011 21:16:43 -0000

Hi Fred,

On Tue, 24 May 2011 10:51:14 -0700
"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:

> Hi Thomas, 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Thomas Narten
> > Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 1:11 PM
> > To: Brzozowski, John
> > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; Bob Hinden
> > Subject: Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD
> > 
> > > Is the intention for the new text to relax the requirement for
> > > auto-configuration?
> > 
> > No. SLAAC remains a MUST. DHCPv6 though is now a SHOULD.
> > 
> > For one thing, DHCP doesn't have an option configure on-link prefixes,
> > so we still need SLAAC.
> 
> Not all links will necessarily require on-link prefixes. For
> those, DHCPv6 alone may be sufficient.
> 

Out of curiosity, wouldn't link locals be classified as SLAAC
addresses (as in, their configuration is stateless and
they're autoconfigured by default)? I understand you're saying that
there are scenarios where RA's wouldn't contain a PIO, or perhaps the
PIO wouldn't have then on-link flag set, however I'm curious if saying
that SLAAC isn't necessary in that scenario is also implying that
link-locals may not be necessary either?

Thanks,
Mark.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email