IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc2462bis] relationship between M/O flags and related protocols

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Fri, 21 May 2004 17:35 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA17193 for <ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:35:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRDu2-0001w2-Pf for ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:33:51 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4LHXotX007439 for ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:33:50 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRDqg-0000xI-9P for ipv6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:30:22 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA16617 for <ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:30:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRDqe-0006DT-92 for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:30:20 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRDpG-00060I-00 for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:28:54 -0400
Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRDoQ-0005vF-04 for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:28:02 -0400
Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BRDmE-0001jG-MF for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:25:47 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRDem-0006kp-03; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:18:04 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BRDZU-0005bo-Qz for ipv6@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:12:37 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA15895 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:12:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BRDZS-0005De-U8 for ipv6@ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:12:35 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BRDYa-0005AQ-00 for ipv6@ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:11:41 -0400
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BRDXn-00053H-00 for ipv6@ietf.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:10:51 -0400
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (64.102.124.13) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 May 2004 10:10:49 -0700
X-BrightmailFiltered: true
Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i4LHAH30021802; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:10:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rdroms-w2k01.cisco.com (che-vpn-cluster-2-118.cisco.com [10.86.242.118]) by flask.cisco.com (MOS 3.4.6-GR) with ESMTP id AIR38717; Fri, 21 May 2004 13:10:16 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20040521130950.02c1d5d0@flask.cisco.com>
X-Sender: rdroms@flask.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 13:10:14 -0400
To: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc2462bis] relationship between M/O flags and related protocols
Cc: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com>, Christian Huitema <huitema@windows.microsoft.com>, ipv6@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <Roam.SIMC.2.0.6.1085157838.3587.nordmark@bebop.france>
References: <"Your message with ID" <y7v4qqabanb.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Sender: ipv6-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: IP Version 6 Working Group (ipv6) <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60

This text is fine with me, too.

- Ralph

At 09:43 AM 5/21/2004 -0700, Erik Nordmark wrote:
> > Or, if you feel happier by mentioning changes of the M bit explicitly,
> > we could alternatively say
> >
> >      The details of how a host uses the M flag, including any use of
> >      the "on" and "off" transitions for this flag, to control the use
> >      of DHCPv6 for address assignment will be described in a separate
> >      document.
> > (based on a previous text from Ralph)
> >
> > This way, we can avoid the use of the "possibly extraneous state
> > variable" which is internal information in the implementation, while
> > keeping the essential idea about external behavior.
>
>The text above is fine with me.
>
>   Erik


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email