[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re: IPv6 WG Call for Adoption:draft-daniel-ipv6-ra-mo-flags-01.txt



Title: Samsung Enterprise Portal mySingle

Hi Pekka

>
> There is of course one corner case here: if a node running host 
> configuration behaviour would omit separate information configuration 
> behavior, in case there was no "full DHCPv6" server in the network, 
> the host would not get even the Information Configuration unless 
> DHCPv6 falled back to sending an information-request in some manner 
> (such as we discussed).
>
> Thus it seemed that in the current draft's specification, there were 
> some (typically unnecessary) steps when both M and O flags are set and 
> the policies set in a certain way, depending on how the DHCP specs are 
> to be implemented to fall back when the server would only support 
> information configuration.
>
> Does that clarify?

>

       The approach that has been taken in the draft is not to invoke the Information Configuraton

        Behaviour, when Host Configuration Behaviour is being invoked. This is true even both

        M and O flags are set and both the policies are either 1 and 2.

        So the issue here is, whether need to invoke the Information Configuration Behaviour

        in case the Host Configuration Behaviour fails irrespective of the O flag and its policy.

        As you suggested, one could implement fall back to ke the Information Configuration Behaviour

        if e Host Configuration Behaviour fails.

 

Syam


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@xxxxxxxx
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------