Hi Brian,

> I agree, after re-reading the formal definitions in RFC 2119. And I
> don't think we need any discussion text; the implications are already
> covered in 3041. 
> 
> The default can be left to the vendor IMHO.

I agree.  I have added the text:

   Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC-3041] 
   SHOULD be supported.  It is recommended that node behavior be configurable 
   when they are available.

br,
John

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to