[dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04: (with COMMENT)
"Mirja Kuehlewind" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Thu, 02 February 2017 14:44 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B180129416; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 06:44:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.42.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148604665210.13944.15621944233917718081.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 06:44:12 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/-ibg_qF3CdmkhUfqS6jXiBnt1E8>
Cc: dhc-chairs@ietf.org, volz@cisco.com, draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol@ietf.org, dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 14:44:12 -0000
Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol-04: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-failover-protocol/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A few questions that are not fully clear to me and maybe need some additional explanation in the draft (or maybe it's just me...): - It's not fully clear to me when a TCP connection is opened or closed. Are the two servers supposed to have one long-lived connection? And if that connection is terminated for any reason, should the primary server try to re-open immediately? And if a (new) connection is (re-)open do I always need to send a CONNECT first, or only if I didn't have any connection with this server before? And if the secondary server goes down and comes up in RECOVER state (sec 8.5.1.), should it open a TCP connection to the primary server, or will always the primary server be the one that opens the connection (and if so when will it do it)? - Also not really clear to me is why OPTION_F_MAX_UNACKED_BNDUPD is needed and how the server should know the right value. I guess you would want to calculate this based on the send buffer, however, not all message have the same size and as such I don't know how to calculate that. And is that really needed? If messages will not be accepted by the receiver-side server, the receive window will be zero and the socket on the sending side will be blocked; no additional message can be send. What will be different if the sender knows in advance when it could potentially happen (but also might not if the other end processes the messages quickly and there is no excessive loss).
- [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-i… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dra… kkinnear
- Re: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dra… Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
- Re: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dra… kkinnear
- Re: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dra… Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
- Re: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dra… kkinnear
- Re: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dra… Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
- Re: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dra… Suresh Krishnan