On 02/28/2018 04:49 AM, Erik Kline wrote: >>> I think we should let >>> nodes create and use addresses as they see fit, and leave it to the >>> apps to figure out what they want to do (given the proper information >>> via useful APIs). >> >> The above said (i.e., the note will be removed in the next rev of this >> document), I think the "note" still gives control to the node to do what >> it pleases -- it was suggesting configuration of profiles for different >> types of networks (which would be a node-configuration setting, as >> opposed to network-induced configuration) >> >> Thoughts? > > I think there's still a difference between having a node-wide policy > and enabling per-app policies. The former could be used to > unnecessarily preclude the latter, and I think it's better to work > toward enabling choice in the apps.
I agree with that. However, there are scenarios in which, unfortunately, you might need to limit application choice: some enterprise deployments are known for that: disabling support for temporary addresses is a widespread practice in such deployments. How could one accommodate such deployments? (ignoring them eventually means that the network admins needs to figure out his own hack) Thanks, -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fg...@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
