 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here are some of my comments for this autoconf draft. The use of the term “DAD” in section 6.1 is undefined
before use. In both sections 6.1 and 6.2 the subnet suggestions are only
valid when, there are no assumptions regarding connectivity between interfaces,
as stated in section 4. Section 6 states “a link with undetermined
connectivity properties” I would suggest using (i.e. no assumptions can
be made regarding connectivity between interfaces) The only thing I would like to see more of is a discussion
on or clarity on more advanced address configuration. A statement as
simple as “information obtained regarding the connectivity properties of
the link can be used to better select addressing/subnets if when available.”
This was hinted at the end of section 4 but let me wanting a little bit more. Overall I think this document is a step in the right direction
and should be moved forward within the autoconf working group. Justin Dean |