Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem

A few comments:

1. The draft should note that per RFC 6434 (IPv6 node requirements), hosts
MUST support SLAAC, but are not required to support DHCPv6, since it's a
SHOULD (and note that until relatively recently - December 2011 - it was a
MAY). So while a network administrator can reasonably assume that SLAAC
will be supported by hosts, he cannot assume that DHCPv6 will be supported.

2. The statement in Section 2.1.1 that "when A flag is set, the SLAAC
protocol didn't provide a prescriptive definition" is incorrect.

RFC 4862 says that if A=0 the host should "silently ignore the Prefix
Information option", and if A=1 "form an address" (bullet point d) or "the
preferred lifetime of the address is reset [...]" (bullet point e). Both
rules MUST be enabled by default, as clearly stated in RFC 4862 section 5.5.

3. In section 3.3 it's not clear why "the administrator wants the hosts to
do DHCPv6-only configuration". All hosts that support DHCPv6 will do
DHCPv6-only if A=0 and M=1. Hosts that don't support DHCPv6... won't be
able to do DHCPv6-only regardless of what the administrator wants them to
do.

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:45 PM, <fred@cisco.com> wrote:

>
> A new draft has been posted, at
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem. Please
> take a look at it and comment.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>