> > no, because the MAY (or may) clause incorrectly implies that host > > implementors are in a good position to make such a decision. > > they're not. > > I'm not saying the host implementor is in a good position. I'm saying > that if the app (or anybody else) hasn't made a decision,
but you have no way of knowing whether the app has made that decision. neither does the host. we have a clear consensus to not change the existing API behavior, which assumes stable addresses by default, and this implies that an app can 'choose' a stable address merely by not taking any special action. this is as it should be. > In this case, the > host implementor is choosing to prioritize one kind of bug (privacy) vs > another (app-compat). host implementors have no business making such decisions. or at least, IETF shouldn't endorse such brain-damage if they do. > But I want it to be clearly > stated that in some circumstances an implementor may decide that privacy > is more important than app-compat. yes I understand what you want. and it's simply unacceptable. Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
