I think for general purpose nodes, ones that can expect to be deployed in a number of different scenarios (or are mobile / nomadic), I would agree with Brian. When a node attaches to a network, it will not know before hand what kind of configuration is supported by the network.
John > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > ext Brian E Carpenter > Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 2:27 PM > To: Thomas Narten > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Issue 20: Node Requirements - DHC vs. RA text > > > > To summarize, the current document > > - retains SLAAC as a MUST > > - lists DHC (for address config) as a MAY > > - makes DHC for other configuration a SHOULD. > > - lists rfc5006bis (DNS RA Config) as a SHOULD > > > > Thoughts? > > That seems compatible with reality, although I'd expect most > software writers to treat DHC as a "MUST implement" in practice. > > Brian > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > [email protected] > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
