>>>>> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 06:39:46 +0200,
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> Personally, I don't think there's any need to refer to the
>> node-req doc.
> I agree. But I think we can even include a ref to DHCPv6
> as informative. I don't see how there can be a normative
> reference to Stateful Add Autoconf. if we are defining
> Stateless Add Autoconf.
So far, all the responses in this thread seem to support having
RFC3315 (DHCPv6) in rfc2462bis as an informative reference, and not
referring to the node-req draft. Is my understanding correct?
I can live with this approach. But I also think it is helpful to
mention like "what is the stateful protocol (and propbably the
mandatory level to implement it) is beyond the scope of rfc2462bis and
is specified in a separate document". Otherwise, readers would
continue to wonder what the stateful protocol is while we could
actually answer the question.
In summary, I'd like to propose
- in the body of rfc2462bis, we do not explicitly say what the
stateful protocol is but mention that it is specified in a separate
document.
- regarding reference, we only list RFC3315 as an informative
reference. (and we probably need some additional text in the body
that refers to the reference)
Does this make sense?
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
