RE: address selection and DHCPv6

[James Carlson <james.d.carlson at sun.com>]

Gray, Eric writes:
> --> The question is not to get an absolutely stable address,
> --> but to make sure that in case multiple addresses are defined,
> --> the one with the highest likelyhood of stability is selected.
> 
> 	When you say "highest likelihood of stability" - is what 
> you really mean "stability is under the control of the entity 
> who most feels the consequences of instability"?
> 
> 	It seems debatable (to me) that an assigned address might 
> change many times more often than a derived address, but (it also
> seems to me) the entity that controls assignment is also the one 
> that has to deal with the consequences...

That seems to me to be a mostly fair analysis of the issue.

If you wanted to avoid the words "highest likelihood of stability" for
the case of DHCPv6 alone, I think you might express it as "least
number of bits specified by the client alone."

Stability is still (to me) an important issue, as it distinguishes
more broadly across manually-configured as well as temporary
addresses.

-- 
James Carlson, KISS Network                    <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

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