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

Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits

To: <David_Hankins at isc.org>, <dhcwg at ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
From: <Greg.Rabil at ins.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:15:32 -0500
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: ipv6 at ietf.org
Delivered-to: ietfarch-dhcwg-web-archive at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-to: dhcwg at core3.amsl.com
In-reply-to: <20081013203914.GG5577 at isc.org>
List-archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/dhcwg>
List-help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <7182010.12431219366974773.JavaMail.weblogic at epml09> <200809171517.m8HFHaaV009346 at cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <9A613C72-E818-410B-9769-8C34E8A78AE1 at cisco.com> <200810131540.m9DFeRGR009155 at rotala.raleigh.ibm.com> <5A8A3864-6D8C-4980-8121-05A0B4F132EC at cisco.com> <1E4636828B4AD841900A31378A9FE3CDEC5A09A0 at usemp11.ins.com> <20081013203914.GG5577 at isc.org>
Sender: dhcwg-bounces at ietf.org
Thread-index: Acktc/aVNGvgQuD3SkKjU0BZyWppHwABDYtg
Thread-topic: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits

>A DHCPv6 server will answer all Solicits, even if it has no addresses to provide, with an Advertise.  The difference is in the status code in each IA.

I don't believe that is an accurate statement.  According to RFC 3736 section 5.1, clients and servers implement the following messages for stateless DHCP service:  Info-Request, Reply, Relay-Forward, and Relay-Reply.

So, there is no Solicit and no Advertise with Stateless DHCPv6.

Greg

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
  - From: Ralph Droms

References:
- [dhcwg] Request for Advices on the draft "draft-cha-ipv6-ra-mo-00.txt"
  - From: HYUN WOOK CHA
- Re: [dhcwg] Request for Advices on the draft "draft-cha-ipv6-ra-mo-00.txt"
  - From: Thomas Narten
- Re: [dhcwg] Request for Advices on the draft "draft-cha-ipv6-ra-mo-00.txt"
  - From: Ralph Droms
- [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
  - From: Thomas Narten
- Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
  - From: Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
  - From: Greg.Rabil
- Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
  - From: David W. Hankins

Prev by Date: Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
Next by Date: [dhcwg] Cost of multicast [was Re: Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits]
Previous by thread: Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
Next by thread: Re: [dhcwg] Brokenness of specs w.r.t. client behavior with M&O bits
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread