IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Fri, 13 May 2011 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 7EC55E0737 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 May 2011 07:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 iXYWhMOdEUNw for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 May 2011 07:29:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34532E069B for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 May 2011 07:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4DETG78013145 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 May 2011 15:29:16 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk p4DETG78013145
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=200903; t=1305296957; bh=JXHvLRMHavvxqEDs8alENu7aU1c=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:References:To; b=xN1Bokpcb9YdADYmSodiUVW3+dk1M9+eg4E4hEk7Tfu6P8QW/vUtYZjdf6XGxtDlE EtpLKQDbenroN26I8XJSAstd+Od+4OD0bigCT6tlWcsLm7Nav/l7nzaZgiOBFfApjO XDd2hy9UklLY8GdWXEyFULq5BWliFXd7zDO+6XLk=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP id n4CFYG003561767317 ret-id none; Fri, 13 May 2011 15:29:16 +0100
Received: from dhcp-152-78-94-92.ecs.soton.ac.uk (dhcp-152-78-94-92.ecs.soton.ac.uk [152.78.94.92]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4DET9Df008996 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 May 2011 15:29:10 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <8AC0FCE1-E53F-4E43-9C55-025136553D88@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 15:29:09 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|d9a7e901bbf649496b9bff43d6a7963cn4CFYG03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|995E5831-C06D-42B2-8955-80BB1372DD09@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <201105131337.p4DDbdao009901@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <8AC0FCE1-E53F-4E43-9C55-025136553D88@gmail.com> <995E5831-C06D-42B2-8955-80BB1372DD09@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=n4CFYG003561767300; tid=n4CFYG003561767317; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=1:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: p4DETG78013145
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
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: Fri, 13 May 2011 14:29:21 -0000

On 13 May 2011, at 14:45, Ralph Droms wrote:

>> 
>> New:
>> 
>>     	<t> DHCPv6 <xref target='RFC3315' /> can be used to obtain and
>> 	configure addresses. In general, a network may provide for the
>> 	configuration of addresses through Router Advertisements,
>> 	DHCPv6 or both.  Some operators have indicated that they do
>> 	not intend to support stateless address autoconfiguration on
>> 	their networks and will require all address assignments be
>> 	made through DHCPv6. On such networks, devices that support
>> 	only stateless address autoconfiguration will be unable to
>> 	automatically configure addresses. Consequently all hosts
>> 	SHOULD implement address configuration via DHCP.</t>
>> 
>> 
>> Is this acceptable?
> 
> Looks fine and appropriate to me, with one nit: s/DHCP/DHCPv6/ in the last line.

Looks good.  

Personally I would probably say 'support' rather than 'implement' in the last sentence, as per the first sentence of 5.9.2 where we say "Hosts MUST support IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration", but either is OK.

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email