>>>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:25:30 -0700, >>>>> Alain Durand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> The following language from RFC2462 is still in 2462bis: > 5.5 Creation of Global Addresses > Global addresses are formed by appending an interface identifier to a > prefix of appropriate length. Prefixes are obtained from Prefix > Information options contained in Router Advertisements. Creation of > global addresses and configuration of other parameters as described > in this section SHOULD be locally configurable. However, the > processing described below MUST be enabled by default. > 5.5.2 Absence of Router Advertisements > If a link has no routers, a host MUST attempt to use stateful > autoconfiguration to obtain addresses and other configuration > information. An implementation MAY provide a way to disable the > invocation of stateful autoconfiguration in this case, but the > default SHOULD be enabled. > ==> Now that we are saying the stateful mechanism is DHCPv6, does this > implies > that a host implementation that does not support DHCPv6 client > is not conformant? > What about an implementation that does only support DHCPv6-lite > for DNS discovery? > If I do not support DHCPv6, can I make the claim that this is > my way to "disable the > invocation of sateful autoconfiguration" ? Before continuing the discussion, please read the following message I sent last week. https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/ipv6/current/msg02227.html I've not seen any responses to this message...I'm not sure if this means an agreement, but if so, the proposed change will affect your above question. 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------
