On May 13, 2011, at 12:02 PM 5/13/11, Thomas Narten wrote:
> Bob,
>
> Bob Hinden <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> While I support changing the requirement to a SHOULD, I would prefer
>> the text to be something like:
>
>> <t> DHCPv6 <xref target='RFC3315' /> can be used to obtain and
>> configure addresses. In general, a network may provide for the
>> configuration of addresses through Router Advertisements,
>> DHCPv6 or both. There will be a wide range of IPv6 deployment models
>> and differences in address assignment requirements. Consequently all
>> hosts
>> SHOULD implement address configuration via DHCP.</t>
>
>> It's not just about what some operators may or may not do. For
>> example enterprises, governments, etc. will also have specific
>> requirements.
>
> I like this text better than what I proposed as well.
Here's my contribution, trying to make an explicit link between the last two
sentences:
<t> DHCPv6 <xref target='RFC3315' /> can be used to obtain and
configure addresses. In general, a network may provide for the
configuration of addresses through Router Advertisements,
DHCPv6 or both. There will be a wide range of IPv6 deployment
models and differences in address assignment requirements,
some of which may require DHCPv6 for address assignment.
Consequently all hosts SHOULD implement address configuration
via DHCPv6.</t>
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------
