Re: Preliminary notes from WG meeting in Memphis

[Charles Perkins <[e-mail]>]

> >* 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.

This matches my recollection.  I reviewed with Jeff a proposal for
introducing key selection in a way quite compatible with our current
drafts, and he seemed to indicate that it made good sense.  I don't
see that the key selection should have any effect on the progress of
the base DHCPv6 specification to IETF last call.
  

> 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.

I don't remember anything about this at the meeting.  I don't
think that protocol documents going to Proposed Standard are
generally expected to show operational experience, especially
in the IPv6 protocol suite.  What's going on here?


Regards,
Charlie P.