Subject: [mif] Issue #15: Use case #1 does not justify standardization...

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 06:58:28 -0500

This issue claims that use case #1 could be resolved using a different type of mechanism.

My opinion:

Since the WG is chartered, explicitly, to standardize a DHCPv6 Route Option and is not currently chartered to document other solutions to the same problem, it is not necessary for us to justify this work item at this point -- that was done at the time that we were chartered to do the work.

My suggestion would be that we close this issue with no changes to the document.

Thoughts?

Margaret