RE: [dhcwg] RE: [Mip6] [Updated] DHCP Option for Home Information Discovery inMIPv6

["Alper Yegin" <[e-mail]>]

Gerardo,

I think it helps to understand the components of the full picture.

[a] Delivery of the info from home AAA to the NAS
[b] Delivery of the info from the NAS (DHCP relay) to the DHCP server.
[c] Delivery of the info from the DHCP server to the DHCP client
[d] Plumbing of all these components


[a], [b], and [c] are all protocol work. [d] is just informational. 

The document draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt covers [b]
and [d].

WiMAX does not use [b]. For that there is no need to have a normative
reference to draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt. It could
have an informative reference to it, but it does not have to.

Alper






> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gerardo Giaretta [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 1:18 AM
> To: Alper Yegin
> Cc: Vijay Devarapalli; [e-mail]; Heejin Jang; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [dhcwg] RE: [Mip6] [Updated] DHCP Option for Home Information
> Discovery inMIPv6
> 
> Alper,
> 
> just one question below in order to understand if there is a real
> technical reason to keep the docs separated..
> 
> > > > But I hope this data point helps: WiMAX Forum NWG architecture is
> using
> > > > draft-jang.
> > >
> > > in what context and how are they planning to use it?
> >
> > The MIP info is brought to the DHCP server via RADIUS and delivered to
> the
> > MN via DHCP.
> >
> 
> Can you please explain which are the technical differences between the
> solution in the DT draft for integrated scenario and the solution
> developped in WiMAX?
> 
> I guess in WiMAX MIP info are brought to DHCP relay (i.e. NAS) and
> then draft-jang is applied. Is this really different from what is
> described in the DT draft?
> 
> --Gerardo
> 
> > > the
> > > WiMAX forum NWG can still use the DHCP options wherever
> > > they are defined.
> >
> > Yes. And WiMAX Forum could also use it even if IETF had concatenated all
> of
> > the RFCs and I-Ds under a single document too.... This I-D being
> referenced
> > whereas the draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt wasn't
> is a
> > solid proof that the former I-D is useful without having to be
> integrated
> > into the latter.
> >
> >
> > > >>the only other mechanism is to manually
> > > >>configure the DHCP servers in the visited link with
> > > >>information like home agent address, home address and home
> > > >>prefix. this is a bad idea.
> >
> >
> > You know that one does not have to put DHCP servers on every subnet,
> instead
> > one can rely on DHCP relays. And that's the used technique for many
> > enterprise networks. So, I don't see why this is a bad idea.
> >
> > Alper
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Vijay
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Alper
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>-----Original Message-----
> > > >>From: Vijay Devarapalli [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > >>Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 6:17 PM
> > > >>To: Heejin Jang
> > > >>Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> > > >>Subject: Re: [Mip6] [Updated] DHCP Option for Home Information
> Discovery
> > > >>inMIPv6
> > > >>
> > > >>Heejin Jang wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>>Hello folks,
> > > >>>We posted an I-D that proposes new DHCP Options for Home
> Information
> > > >>>Discovery in MIPv6.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Kindly note that the previous version of this draft is
> > > >>>"draft-jang-dhc-haopt-02.txt" but the name is slightly changed into
> > > >>>"draft-jang-mip6-hiopt-00.txt" while keeping almost the same
> contents.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>The drafts referencing this draft such as
> > > >>>draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-split-02.txt and
> > > >>>draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt need to be
> revised
> > > >>>accordingly.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>We would appreciate to hear your comments.
> > > >>
> > > >>when this draft was discussed in the MIP6 bootstrapping
> > > >>design team, many people wanted to integrate the two DHCP
> > > >>options into
> > > >>draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-integrated-dhc-01.txt.
> > > >>this was mainly because the options defined in the document
> > > >>have limited applicability beyond the integrated scenario
> > > >>solution document. the only other mechanism is to manually
> > > >>configure the DHCP servers in the visited link with
> > > >>information like home agent address, home address and home
> > > >>prefix. this is a bad idea.
> > > >>
> > > >>there was some opposition and we never reached an agreement.
> > > >>
> > > >>so I suggest including these options into the integrated
> > > >>scenario solution document for these options to get
> > > >>standardized quickly.
> > > >>
> > > >>Vijay
> > > >>
> > > >>_______________________________________________
> > > >>Mip6 mailing list
> > > >>[e-mail]
> > > >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dhcwg mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> >


_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg