Re: [dhcwg] WG consensus action: ACCEPT LL34 better transition to routable from v4LL using DHCP

On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 22:13, Robert Elz wrote:
>   | That's not exactly independent.
> 
> It is independent state machines - they are just dependencies
> on when they're used.

I'd say that's mostly semantics. There's clearly a dependency but I
think you're saying that it is limited to the DHCP client sending, as
part of one of its own state transitions, the v4LL state machine a start
or stop signal.

I can live with that (it's more or less what I expected the requirement
to be). But I do agree with Ted that there is some danger of
misinterpritation. We need some fairly specific language on
implementation issues to steer implementors away from harmful
interpretations.

	MikaL