Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6
Jitesh N Verma <jitesh@india.hp.com> Thu, 24 January 2002 05:43 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA07237 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:43:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id AAA03405 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:43:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA03314; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:38:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA03283 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:38:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from palrel13.hp.com (palrel13.hp.com [156.153.255.238]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA07100 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 00:38:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from chitha.india.hp.com (chitha.india.hp.com [15.10.43.31]) by palrel13.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37806E00392; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 21:37:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from jitesh@localhost) by chitha.india.hp.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.8.6 SMKit7.02) id KAA19219; Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:51:32 +0530 (IST)
From: Jitesh N Verma <jitesh@india.hp.com>
Message-Id: <200201240521.KAA19219@chitha.india.hp.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6
To: rbhibbs@pacbell.net
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:51:31 +0530
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <JCELKJCFMDGAKJCIGGPNCEJHDJAA.rbhibbs@pacbell.net> from Richard Barr Hibbs at Jan "23, " 2002 "03:29:48" pm
X-Mailer: ELM [$Revision: 1.17.214.2 $]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi List, I am strongly in favour of including DNS option in base draft. The way we are proceeding on DHCPv6 base draft, I am sure that the separate option draft will also take quite sometime to become PS/RFC. In such a situation, implementation of DHCPv6 without DNS option will be meaningless. DNS option is immediate requirement for IPv6 deployment, since most of the applications use DNS. In one sentence: DHCPv6 is LAME without DNS option. Cheers, Jitesh > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ted Lemon > > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 12:19 > > > > I don't see any reason to remove options about which there is no > > controversy from the DHCPv6 draft. I think it's fine to > > say "no more," but not to start taking them all out. > > > ...exactly. Is it possible to construct a simple test by which to judge an > option as appropriate for inclusion in the base document? For example: > > (1) is it required for implementation or deployment of a crucial service > (for example, DNS or SLP) > > (2) is it essential to implement mandatory or highly desirable functionality > (such as authentication or security)? > > (3) is it necessary to support transition from IPv4 to IPv6? > > (4) is it currently widely deployed with DHCPv4? > > (5) has the option been stably defined for DHCPv6 for at least several draft > revisions? > > > > _______________________________________________ > dhcwg mailing list > dhcwg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg > -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ~ ~ *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* ^ Jitesh N. Verma Tel. 91-80-225 1554 Ext. 1424 ^ ^ HEWLETT PACKARD Fax. 91-80-220 0196 ^ ^ INDIA SOFTWARE OPERATIONS Email. jitesh@india.hp.com ^ ^ 29, CUNNINGHAM ROAD Pager. 9624-263608 ^ ^ BANGALORE 560 052 __ Telnet. 847-1424 ^ ^ / / ^ ^ / /___ _____ ^ ^ / __ // __ / ^ ^ / / / // /_/ / ^ ^ /_/ /_// ____/ ^ ^ / / ^ ^ /_/ ^ *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Mark Stapp
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Bernie Volz (EUD)
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jitesh N Verma
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Bernie Volz (EUD)
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Martin Stiemerling
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Vijay Bhaskar A K
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Vijay Bhaskar A K
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 John Schnizlein
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Richard Barr Hibbs
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jitesh N Verma
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Martin Stiemerling
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Bernie Volz (EUD)
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms