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

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch at muada.com>]

On 14 okt 2008, at 22:35, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> > I would rather move in the direction where we all implement RFC  
> > 5006 and
> > DHCPv6 is only used to _register_ addresses that hosts select for
> > themselves if central knowledge of which host has which address is  
> > desired.

> How would that work on sites where the IT department policy is to
> pre-assign specific addresses to specific interfaces (i.e. MAC  
> addresses)?
> That is very common practice for IPv4 and I don't see it changing
> on such sites just because of a change of version number.

I realize that this preference on my part isn't going to receive IETF  
consensus so this is a tangent.

But to answer your question: _assigning_ addresses centrally is  
incompatible with SEND and shim6. I'd rather have the latter than the  
former. If hosts register their addresses management is still possible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------