On 02/23/2016 09:47 AM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Fernando Gont <fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > That's actually the contrary of what the specs say today: if M=1 you do > DHCPv6, not SLAAC. > > > I don't see any statement in 4861 that says that. Per 4861, M=1 means > "DHCPv6 is available", not "nodes should do DHCPv6". Relevant text: > > M 1-bit "Managed address configuration" flag. When > set, it indicates that addresses are available via > Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol [DHCPv6]. This is the first one I found: Moreover, information may also be obtained through other dynamic means like DHCPv6. Hosts accept the union of all received information; the receipt of a Router Advertisement MUST NOT invalidate all information received in a previous advertisement or from another source. If you want, take this as a "may". But your text says SHOULD NOT, and may != SHOULD NOT. Besides, what if say, there's different address information available via RA vs DHCPv6? --the text I cited above suggests that you accept the union, but you suggest that you accept only the info provided by the RAs. Again, I don't disagree (per se) with the proposal to do SLAAC rather than DHCPv6 . But, I just think the behavior being suggested differs from what we currently have -- hence the suggested "Update". -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492