IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dhcpv6bis] Fwd: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt

Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu> Thu, 20 July 2017 12:40 UTC

Return-Path: <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
X-Original-To: dhcpv6bis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcpv6bis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F5CE131771 for <dhcpv6bis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=iol.unh.edu
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TpWlMpE1rBt4 for <dhcpv6bis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22c.google.com (mail-qt0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AF0D1317D5 for <dhcpv6bis@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id 21so21198473qtx.3 for <dhcpv6bis@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=c9IIReMPepP2jeHsfMpI2JoZXzcc+YP212BEn+xzBfM=; b=OKYXJxkEQYk7tT26c9AQ1mSkMSqRRhqYpNUO4AUwGL0lHwwdzq2mUx65u7OEdOnFaj 5GqZSR2iRqKpUS17Q/8TuNN4rl9G+z4PnjFZs37FqxtLRK33mppI2IILdqHtFyWZUHCC wFKTBFI+fzTw4NEbhd8WYvWWfKPnqYfuF3QFw=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=c9IIReMPepP2jeHsfMpI2JoZXzcc+YP212BEn+xzBfM=; b=o45asONPT3MfxEbtwxwAv1pSnH+cNFlCxQ/cbHgww50bSCi1ra4dWHwj7shYDDKCNp 59bYDI/T2kBieuJLXcoChtqXfU2bkf6eLuL6SgGFGz2J3hreR3lLeG+TNDcN+QrQc3uF yV5pmHWpzbZJH615eCeVkj+RLbK1IQNTbc3fNDrbc+IXs2awLd/80FHyTzzOpAKz+Vdu NVed3B2OuHCCazVtwOqDp4KUdzQ/5lxD//vqYoKs3T/1HZPH34MgcMmkgQKi08DDct4e Cco30+kgUsjm9UawzB/YsEVr5MmUJrxnfenN2ZSXQpv/r7t2RZKItyN0gUk5D6fT3C4j 3LsQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw112ynkLngQheZvO8vTrP06Cy2HmE+HEE3mZdlwsCTAEGYHOfjoFC jq6xBMv28Ps6/T3GUiijyLJrabHXQI2r
X-Received: by 10.237.32.196 with SMTP id 62mr4346971qtb.99.1500554434532; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.37.106 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 05:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <FD6C17FB-B842-4919-AE7D-CAB89641E9F5@cisco.com>
References: <596CF817.8040900@foobar.org> <BC0BBAF5-B016-44B5-8D73-BC9382CB79A9@google.com> <20170719090835.GC45648@Space.Net> <CAKD1Yr29MmGJuX+uhXaroB6UMRBBWBscCZPaMjaVscL0q7a7pg@mail.gmail.com> <98208c2e-7524-7afa-b0c8-865f251cd66e@gmail.com> <20170720062751.GL45648@Space.Net> <CAKD1Yr1ihnqHAzjhPcA8HB7sBBRwht2t5epJqQA-B_YGnfoTQA@mail.gmail.com> <20170720083002.GT45648@Space.Net> <20170720105009.34003050@echo.ms.redpill-linpro.com> <CAKD1Yr3SZAEbAvjr4Czv_tHN+-UVYGfnZ+SyaiJ0BNkvNr-d2g@mail.gmail.com> <7776E80F-EBBF-4E30-94A5-E6570AB8B84A@cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr1oSB9CH1KBVrAgePAkNVsb0ZHKOTywoUmDQPHtwEp3_w@mail.gmail.com> <FD6C17FB-B842-4919-AE7D-CAB89641E9F5@cisco.com>
From: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 08:40:13 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOSSMjX_nQvuJ0hW1UTWruOctxWPeaeY6ZQnTYUijJSKCGCobA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
Cc: "dhcpv6bis@ietf.org" <dhcpv6bis@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0cbf34097a610554bf0e0a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcpv6bis/Y4WqGe3z7YsBeW__CRtMmOq3L_s>
Subject: Re: [Dhcpv6bis] Fwd: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dhcpv6bis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "DHCPv6 \(RFC3315\) bis discussion list" <dhcpv6bis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcpv6bis>, <mailto:dhcpv6bis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcpv6bis/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcpv6bis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcpv6bis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcpv6bis>, <mailto:dhcpv6bis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 12:40:38 -0000

Hi Bernie,

Yes I was thinking the same thing, probably a SHOULD.

The story that I hear about this roaming on wireless-type network.

~Tim

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hi:
>
> For -10, should we consider making this (see below) a SHOULD:
>
> 3315bis-09 does not recommend this, it says the client MAY do it and MUST
> rate-limit it (with an example rate-limit of one every 30 seconds).
>
>
> In any case, the server still needs to keep track
>
>
> Also, while this is true, do we think that is a serious issue? How
> frequently are network prefixes changed? With v6 they are probably more
> stable than they have been for v4. So likely a false argument.
>
> - Bernie (from iPhone)
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From:* Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
> *Date:* July 20, 2017 at 11:42:56 AM GMT+2
> *To:* "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
> *Cc:* Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>, james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>, IPv6
> Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* *Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for
> draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt*
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com>
> wrote:
>
>> >> What if the topology change was such that the global address of the
>> DHCPv6 server is no longer valid due to renumbering?
>>
>> Address of DHCPv6 server does not matter - it can change. Clients
>> generally never directly address packets to its address. They multicast to
>> fe02::1:2.
>>
>
> Surely the RECONFIGURE is not multicast, but unicast from server to client?
>
>
>> Also, 3315bis recommends that clients refresh information via dhcp when a
>> network change occurs (such as new prefixes in an RA appear).
>>
>
> 3315bis-09 does not recommend this, it says the client MAY do it and MUST
> rate-limit it (with an example rate-limit of one every 30 seconds).
>
> In any case, the server still needs to keep track of all topology changes
> in order to give a correct answer.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dhcpv6bis mailing list
> Dhcpv6bis@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcpv6bis
>
>


-- 

Now offering testing for SDN applications and controllers in our SDN switch
test bed. Learn more today http://bit.ly/SDN_IOLPR

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email