> Okay, so how about revising section 5.7 as follows? In this proposal,
> we still have the new section, but I tried to limit the description to
> warnings based on experiences of existing implementations.
>
> 5.7 Retaining Configured Addresses for Stability
>
> An implementation that has stable storage may want to retain
> addresses in the storage when the addresses were acquired using
> stateless address autoconfiguration. Assuming the lifetimes used are
> reasonable, this technique implies that a temporary outage (less than
> the valid lifetime) of a router will never result in the node losing
> its global address even if the node were to reboot. When this
> technique is used, it should also be noted that the expiration times
> of the preferred and valid lifetimes should be retained, instead of
> or in addition to the lifetimes themselves, in order to avoid
> unexpected lifetime expiration during the boot period.
The last part sounds like one need to make sure the address lives
long enough; my concern is about it living for too long.
So I'd reword the last sentence to say:
When this
technique is used, it should also be noted that the expiration times
of the preferred and valid lifetimes must be retained, in order to
prevent usage of an address after it has become invalid.
> Further details on this kind of extension are beyond the scope of
> this document.
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
