Re: [v6ops] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt

> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg24278.html

+ this url for the diffs

> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability-05

see section 8 - recommendations.

Nick

Ted Lemon wrote:
> The RFC doesn't say that anywhere in it.   There is no version of the
> draft that was published on 2/12/2016.   The -01 version of the draft
> was published in March of that year; the final version in July.   Can
> you please point out the place in the text where it says what you are
> saying it says?
> 
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org
> <mailto:nick@foobar.org>> wrote:
> 
>     draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00 has just been posted as an ID.
> 
>     It has recently been claimed that IETF best current practice is that
>     DHCPv6 is not recommended due to the recommendations section in
>     RFC7934/BCP204.
> 
>     The relevant text was slipped into
>     draft-ietf-v6ops-host-addr-availability-05 on Feb 12, 2016, a couple of
>     days before the document went into IETF LC.  There was no discussion
>     about this text change either in the v6ops working group or at IETF
>     review or IESG level: perhaps the modification appeared innocuous or
>     maybe it just wasn't not noticed.
> 
>     Next thing, there's a BCP which is being interpreted as meaning that
>     DHCPv6 is NOT RECOMMENDED for operational use.  Wow. :-)
> 
>     This presents a variety of problems, the most serious of which are 1)
>     that a BCP is implying that the use of DHCPv6 was "NOT RECOMMENDED"
>     without extensive discussion or debate about this particular issue at
>     the relevant working group, and ignores the both the widespread use of
>     the protocol and its active development at the ietf, and 2) that a
>     change in the status of DHCPv6 to "NOT RECOMMENDED" leaves a huge hole
>     in the IPv6 host specification.
> 
>     Job and I believe that this went through by mistake and that if the WG
>     had noticed the change at the time, consensus would never have been
>     reached on what is a serious semantic change to IETF lore.
> 
>     Right now, the most prudent course of action would be to roll back the
>     change until a proper debate has been had.  We invite WG comments on
>     this doc.
> 
>     Nick
> 
>     internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>     > A new version of I-D, draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt
>     > has been successfully submitted by Nick Hilliard and posted to the
>     > IETF repository.
>     >
>     > Name:         draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update
>     > Revision:     00
>     > Title:                Update for IPv6 Host Address Availability
>     Recommendations
>     > Document date:        2017-07-17
>     > Group:                Individual Submission
>     > Pages:                4
>     > URL:           
>     https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt
>     <https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt>
>     > Status:       
>      https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update/
>     <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update/>
>     > Htmlized:     
>      https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00>
>     > Htmlized:     
>      https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00
>     <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00>
>     >
>     >
>     > Abstract:
>     >    The IPv6 Host Address Availability Recommendations Best Current
>     >    Practice (RFC 7934), describes why IPv6 hosts should use multiple
>     >    global addresses when attaching to a network.  This document
>     updates
>     >    RFC 7934 by removing a recommendation for networks to give the host
>     >    the ability to use new addresses without requiring explicit
>     requests.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>     submission
>     > until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>     tools.ietf.org <http://tools.ietf.org>.
>     >
>     > The IETF Secretariat
>     >
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     v6ops mailing list
>     v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>
> 
>