I like Ralph's text also.
/jim 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 1:13 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: SHOULD or MAY for invoking DHCP services using M/O flags
> 
> 
> > I disagree with this wording.  In particular, the Solicit/...
> > exchange is *not* limites to address configuration.  The 
> > Information-Request/Reply message exchange is not "Stateful 
> DHCPv6".  
> > "the DHCPv6 Server" might be misleading as there can be 
> more than one 
> > DHCPv6 server.
> > 
> > I don't think the purpose of the exchanges need to be mentioned.  I 
> > think the following would suffice:
> > 
> > M = ON means configuration information is available from a DHCPv6 
> > service through Solicit/Advertise/Request/Reply or 
> Solicit/Reply (if 
> > Rapid Commit is
> > enabled) message exchanges.
> > 
> > O = ON means configuration information is available from a DHCPv6 
> > service through Information-request /Reply message exchanges.
> 
> I tend to side with Ralph's text.
> 
> John
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to