Hi, 2012/10/24 Lorenzo Colitti <[email protected]>:
> As regards the address selection option specifically: > > 1. The option itself is still work in progress in 6man. So the modifications > should happen in 6man, not here. Otherwise we will have two working groups > working on the same option which is likely to have bad results. > 3. I don't understand the use case (Section 3.1). If the DHCPv6 relay is in > the mobile access gateway, then it's in the mobile operator's network. If > it's in the mobile operator's network, then how can it "influence the DHCPv6 > Server in the home network"? In general, the DHCPv6 server in the home > network has no way of talking to the mobile operator's network. It looks to me this is not the modifications to the address selection option happening in 6man, but it is another proposal for tweaking DHCPv6 messages from clients at DHCP relay agent. So, in other words, this option just depends on the address selection option. If it is true, a work that depends on another work can be done separately in a separate wg. I do not know whether mif is the right place for this proposal, but generally speaking it is the right place where the scope and motivation matche best. Thanks. _______________________________________________ mif mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
