Re: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags

To: Bernie Volz <volz at cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags
From: Alain Durand <Alain.Durand at Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 10:08:52 -0700
Cc: "'IETF IPv6 Mailing List'" <ipv6 at ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <000001c4310e$8a912e10$6801a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
List-help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: IP Version 6 Working Group (ipv6) <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>,<mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>,<mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <000001c4310e$8a912e10$6801a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
Sender: ipv6-admin at ietf.org

On May 3, 2004, at 5:59 AM, Bernie Volz wrote:

You can certainly have hosts that always run DHCPv6, or at least policy
settings that would allow it on a host.

Or the opposite... That is, hosts that have a policy to not turn DHCPv6 on
even when receiving O or M.

- Alain.

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

References:
- RE: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags
  - From: Bernie Volz

Prev by Date: RE: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags
Next by Date: I-D ACTION:draft-perlman-rbridge-00.txt
Previous by thread: RE: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags
Next by thread: RE: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Re: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.