Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

["George, Wes" <[e-mail]>]

From: Karsten Thomann <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>

I have still problems to understand why a message on one link/interface should be able to shutdown the whole IPv4 stack or the dhcpv4 client, the scope of the message should be limited to the link/interface on which the message was received and not further...

In my opinion the system should remove the v4 address, and the dhcpv4 client should stop sending discover messages on that specific interface, and the easiest way to tell dhcpv4 to do that is a dhcpv4 message.


WG] I’ve noted privately to Simon that I think we need much better text in the draft discussing what to do when there are multiple interfaces:
- when one interface has been given a code to indicate one of the 3 statuses documented in the draft, what if anything do you do on the others?
- When several interfaces receive the same or conflicting codes, what do you do, which has priority, or do you default to the least restrictive?
- when a local configuration is present to override the network-sent code, what happens?
- etc.

Thanks,

Wes

Anything below this line has been added by my company’s mail server, I have no control over it.
-----------

________________________________
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.