Re: [dhcwg] RE: purpose of m/o bit
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dhcwg] RE: purpose of m/o bit
- To: ipv6 at ietf.org, dhcwg at ietf.org
- Subject: Re: [dhcwg] RE: purpose of m/o bit
- From: Syam Madanapalli <smadanapalli at gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 23:11:24 +0530
- Cc: Thomas Narten <narten at us.ibm.com>, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch at muada.com>, jinmei at isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp, "Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <volz at cisco.com>, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon at nominum.com>, "Bound, Jim" <jim.bound at hp.com>, "Ralph Droms \(rdroms\)" <rdroms at cisco.com>
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=BtEtjmO+OoalkF0k63/yxlmTqW2eDqOllzQjSeizcQC+L0RQPiW77UG8k3SyPxZltfX/J1fmOCNZUx5/aoyUWKyphZUErXENVSdlmd6HafPTjs3rIL71Mep9d+TCt6G16i41LeD8WjRC09xeu1WHodmpJk1xIuvP8cCtiATtqgQ=
- In-reply-to: <8E296595B6471A4689555D5D725EBB21338D3D@xmb-rtp-20a.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: <8E296595B6471A4689555D5D725EBB21338D3D@xmb-rtp-20a.amer.cisco.com>
- Reply-to: Syam Madanapalli <smadanapalli at gmail.com>
- Sender: ipv6-bounces at ietf.org
Isn't it such a long idscussion a proof for the confusion in
understanding the M/O
bits? Instead of leaving the discussion here, thinking that there is
no confusion or
be fore taking any radical changes (either discarding M or O or both flags, or
making changes to the DHCPv6 protocols), it is better to document the inteded
use of M/O flags as an informational document, so that we will have uniform
implementations in th future. I am sure this (intended use of M/O
flags) is very
obvious for some people here, but definitely help many others. Also
this information
will be handy for the implementer.
- Syam
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.