Re: Preliminary notes from WG meeting in Memphis
Ralph Droms <droms@bucknell.edu> Thu, 17 April 1997 10:53 UTC
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa25276; 17 Apr 97 6:53 EDT
Received: from marge.bucknell.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07464; 17 Apr 97 6:53 EDT
Received: from reef.bucknell.edu by mail.bucknell.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/17Jul96-0109PM) id AA31252; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 06:44:37 -0400
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 06:44:37 -0400
Message-Id: <v02130509af7ba7aefd36@[134.82.7.153]>
Errors-To: droms@bucknell.edu
Reply-To: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Originator: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Sender: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Ralph Droms <droms@bucknell.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu>
Subject: Re: Preliminary notes from WG meeting in Memphis
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Discussion of DHCP for IPv4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0
At 2:06 PM 4/12/97, bound@zk3.dec.com wrote: > >>* DHCPv6 (dhc-dhcpv6-09.txt, dhc-v6exts-05.txt) >> - current drafts need further >> editorial review and clarification; serious concerns about security >> raised by WG; v6 docs also need to reflect current v4 operational >> experience (esp. wrt multiple servers) > >The strategy agreed to at the DHCPv6 session was: > >We will fix editorial legacy parts missed in DHCPv6 spec. That will >move to IETF Last Call. If the IESG and IETF find no other issues Jeff >Schiller will permit it to move to PS as we promised to add key >selection to our v6-exts draft. Charlie and I should have a fix for >the ext draft shortly. OK. At the time of the WG meeting your meeting with Jeff had not taken place. The meeting notes will reflect Jeff's concerns in the meeting; how about "Jeff Schiller expressed concern about security issues - Jim Bound and Charlie Perkins will review those issues with Jeff"? >What "exactly/precisely" does the last statement mean "v6 docs need to >reflect current v4 operational experience"... I don't recall that >discussion at the DHCPv6 meeting. There is experience with DHCPv4 that indicates specific features in DHCPv4 may make the development of a server-server protocol more difficult. Put another way, if we had known some details about server-server interactions, some minor changes in the DHCPv4 protocol would have made the server-server protocol much easier to specify. The last statement reflects that concern. - Ralph