Re: Rogue RA WGLC

[Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>]

On Nov 20, 2008, at 10:40 AM, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:

> On Thursday 20 November 2008 18:14:41 Fred Baker, you wrote:
> > So I understand your comment as less than supportive of the  
> > document. In what ways do you believe it needs to change?
> I am just dubious about the DHCPv6 solution. I think it needs to be  
> better studied, so that we understand what (if anything) it would  
> solve.
I think operational folks can tell you pretty quickly what it solves.  
It enables an operator to specify an address for an end system as  
opposed to letting the end system dream one up. There are a set of  
people who think that is important. In this context, it also allows  
them to specify to a host what default gateway to choose with a view  
to not choosing others.
If the argument is "I just think people should be using  
autoconfiguration", I have no problem with autoconfiguration, but I  
know network managers that do. "I don't like it" is no where near as  
useful a comment as "I have identified a problem".
Given that context, what do you believe needs to change in the document?