Brian,

2012/10/16 Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]>:
> Hi,
>
> I support this draft but have a couple of comments.
>
>>    A:   Automatic Row Addition flag.  This flag toggles the Automatic
>>         Row Addition flag at client hosts, which is described in the
>>         section 2.1 in RFC 6724 [RFC6724].  If this flag is set to 1, it
>>         does not change client host behavior, that is, a client MAY
>>         automatically add additional site-specific rows to the policy
>>         table.  If set to 0, the Automatic Row Addition flag is
>>         disabled, and a client MAY NOT automatically add rows to the
>>         policy table.
>
> This text includes "MAY NOT" (in upper case). This is specifically not
> covered by RFC 2119 because it's unclear. I think we want "MUST NOT"
> instead. Or do we want "SHOULD NOT"? The existence of this flag is
> a "SHOULD" in RFC 6724.

Oops. Thank you for pointing this out.

I think "SHOULD NOT" is better.
As we do not prohibit manual policy table configuration, so "MUST NOT"
should not work.

>>    P:   Privacy Preference flag.  This flag toggles the Privacy
>>         Preference flag at client hosts, which is described in the
>>         section 5 in RFC 6724 [RFC6724].  If this flag is set to 1, it
>>         does not change client host behavior, that is, a client SHOULD
>>         prefer temporary addresses.  If set to 0, the Privacy Preference
>>         flag is disabled, and a client SHOULD prefer public addresses.
>
> I am a little bothered by those two SHOULDs. It seems to me that they subtly
> modify what is said in RFC 6724, where the relevant text is quite subtle
> already. I would prefer to see the two SHOULD clauses deleted. Alternatively,
> s/SHOULD/will/ would better align the text with RFC 6724.

It sounds good to me.

>
> Nit: [I-D.ietf-6man-stable-privacy-addresses] is defined but not used.
>

I'll delete in the revision.

Thanks.

> Regards
>    Brian Carpenter
>
> On 10/10/2012 09:28, Ole Trøan wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> This message starts a two week 6MAN Working Group on advancing:
>>
>>       Title           : Distributing Address Selection Policy using DHCPv6
>>       Author(s)    : A. Matsumoto, T. Fujisaki, T. Chown
>>       Filename    : draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-opt-06.txt
>>       Pages        : 10
>>       Date           : 2012-09-21
>>
>>       http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-opt-06
>>
>> as Proposed Standard.  Substantive comments and statements of support for 
>> advancing this document should be directed to the mailing list.  Editorial 
>> suggestions can be sent to the authors.  This last call will end on 24. 
>> October 2012.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ole Trøan & Bob Hinden
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to