Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-dhc-addr-notification - Respond by December 11, 2023

On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 10:00 AM Bernie Volz <[email protected]> wrote:

> Keeping it simple is far better. Perhaps we should even consider that once
> a client receives confirmation that the link supports address registration,
> it sends them regardless of what future Reply’s (or Advertises) say. Only
> when the client believes the link has changed, does it clear the flag and
> send something (Information-Request) with the registration option in the
> ORO list when it lands at a (possibly) new location.
>

FWIW, I agree that this is the simplest and best approach. It simplifies
implementations, because they no longer need to track which servers
returned which option. Making this more complex is probably not worth it:
there are no functional benefits, and the only benefit is reduced multicast
traffic while the option is being rolled out or while the network is
reconfigured.

Michael, can you live with just saying that the client will enable
registration as soon as it gets confirmation that the network supports it,
and only asks again if it believes that the link has changed?

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg