the context of DHCPv6 is: "does not require the maintenance of any dynamic
state for individual clients" (RFC 3736). The server does, of course,
maintain configuration state and can make decisions about the response sent
to any specific client based on the server's configuration. (And,
autonomous address assignment isn't "stateless" - the source of the RAs
maintains configuration state, the host maintains state about the addresses
it has selected.) So, "stateless" really is misleading. "Autonomous/managed" or "serverless/server-based" might be more correct...
- Ralph
At 09:09 AM 4/14/2004 -0700, Alain Durand wrote:
On Apr 14, 2004, at 3:48 AM, Ralph Droms wrote:
Jinmei-san,
I think DHCPv6 ought to be cited as the protocol for other configuration information, as well.
This is the logical extension.
However, it seems to me the phrase "stateful protocol for *other* configurations" is a little misleading. I think the word "stateful" could be dropped.
Hummm, what about a DHCPv6 server that would return different values of some config parameters
for different requesting nodes?
I think the whole notion of stateful vs stateless is a bit misleading/confusing anyway, so maybe you're right,
we should drop the word.
- Alain.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
