Yes, that draft covers how to disable the assignment of an address
in the 169.254.0.0/16 prefix. The ZeroConf WG has the current
version of of a draft that describes how stateless autoconfiguration
works and actually (re)specifies the prefix.
%
%
% Are you refering to RFC 2563 (DHCP Option to Disable Stateless
% Auto-Configuration in IPv4 Clients) or something else? We are looking at
% using this mechanism and if there are issues with it, I want to make sure I
% understand them...
%
%
% John
%
%
% Bill Manning wrote:
% >
% > %
% > % Sorry to barge in with a technical, standards-related question. It
% > % seems that there is a common practice that when a host asks for an
% > % IPv4 address, such as through DHCP, but the host isn't attached to
% > % the network, that the software gives it an address of 169.254.x.y. Is
% > % this documented in any RFC? Should it be?
% > %
% > % --Paul Hoffman, Director
% > % --VPN Consortium
% > %
% >
% > It was documented a year after its delegation in a now expired draft
% > by Richard Troll. There is an RFC that describes problems with auto
% > configuration using this prefix. There is also a current draft in/from
% > zeroconf that talks about this prefix. I've had a draft that describes
% > this prefix killed a couple of times by the IESG/IAB.
% > The prefix was originally delegated after the LA IETF. You'll find a
% > brief mention of the action on the last page fo the DHCP wg minutes.
% >
% > --
% > --bill
%
--
--bill