RE: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-03.txt published
"Bernie Volz" <volz@metrocast.net> Mon, 22 December 2003 19:57 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03219 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AYWB0-0006v0-Qr for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:15 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hBMJvErb026593 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:14 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AYWB0-0006uq-Gb for dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:14 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03167 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AYWAx-0000s9-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:11 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AYWAu-0000s0-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:10 -0500
Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AYWAu-0000rx-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:08 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AYWAn-0006tq-Ek; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:57:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AYWAP-0006so-Hx for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:56:37 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03091 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:56:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AYWAM-0000nI-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:56:34 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AYWAK-0000nB-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:56:34 -0500
Received: from aphrodite.gwi.net ([207.5.128.164]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AYWAJ-0000n0-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:56:31 -0500
Received: from BVolz (d-216-195-132-224.metrocast.net [216.195.132.224]) by aphrodite.gwi.net (8.12.6p3/8.12.6) with ESMTP id hBMJu557011576; Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:56:14 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from volz@metrocast.net)
From: Bernie Volz <volz@metrocast.net>
To: 'Ralph Droms' <rdroms@cisco.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-03.txt published
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:56:09 -0500
Message-ID: <000001c3c8c5$a7e68200$6401a8c0@BVolz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C3C89B.BF107A00"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031221133312.01eaf470@flask.cisco.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,HTML_50_60, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60
Ralph: OK by me. - Bernie -----Original Message----- From: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-admin@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Droms Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 1:46 PM To: dhcwg@ietf.org Subject: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-03.txt published I've submitted draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-03.txt for publication. This revision includes changes in response to comments from the IESG. The most important changes are to section 5: * text that describes use of Information-request/Reply message exchange when a host moves to a new link has been deleted * text added referring to draft-ietf-dhc-dna-ipv4-04 (which addresses the problem of link attachment in IPv4) and to work on defining mechanism to control host use of Information-request/Reply message exchange (e.g., draft-chown-dhc-stateless-dhcpv6-renumbering; note that no specific drafts are cited in draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-03.txt) I've included the revised section and an HTML diff of the -02 and -03 revs of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless. Please respond with comments... - Ralph ===== 5. Implementation of Stateless DHCP The client indicates that it is requesting configuration information by sending an Information-request message that includes an Option Request option specifying the options that it wishes to receive from the DHCP server. For example, if the client is attempting to obtain a list of DNS recursive name servers, it identifies the DNS Recursive Name Server option in the Information-request message. The server determines the appropriate configuration parameters for the client based on its configuration policies and responds with a Reply message containing the requested parameters. In this example, the server would respond with DNS configuration parameters. As described in section 18.1.5 of RFC 3315, a node may include a Client Identifier option in the Information-request message to identify itself to a server, because the server administrator may want to customize the server's response to each node, based on the node's identity. RFC 3315 does not define any mechanisms through which the time at which a host uses an Information-request message to obtain updated configuration parameters can be controlled. The dhc WG has undertaken the development of such a mechanism or mechanisms which will be published as Standards-track RFC(s). RFC 3315 also does not provide any guidance about when a host might use an Information-request message to obtain updated configuration parameters when the host has moved to a new link. The dhc WG is reviewing a related document, "Detection of Network Attachment (DNA) in IPv4" [8], which describes how a host using IPv4 can determine when to use DHCPv4. Either the dhc WG or a WG formed from the dna BOF will undertake development of a similar document for IPv6. [8] Aboba, B., "Detection of Network Attachment (DNA) in IPv4", draft-ietf-dhc-dna-ipv4-04 (work in progress), October 2003. ===== 5. Implementation of Stateless DHCP The client indicates that it is requesting configuration information by sending an Information-request message that includes an Option Request option specifying the options that it wishes to receive from the DHCP server. For example, if the client is attempting to obtain a list of DNS recursive name servers, it identifier identifies the DNS Recursive Name Server option in the Information-request message. The server determines the appropriate configuration parameters for the client based on its configuration policies and responds with a Reply message containing the requested parameters. In this example, the server would respond with DNS configuration parameters. A As described in section 18.1.5 of RFC 3315, a node uses the may include a Client Identifier option in the Information-request message to identify itself to a server, because the server administrator may want to customize the server's response to each node, based on the node's identity. Whenever RFC 3315 does not define any mechanisms through which the time at which a client may have moved host uses an Information-request message to a new link, the obtain updated configuration parameters obtained for the interfaces on that link may no longer can be appropriate for the link to which controlled. The dhc WG has undertaken the client is attached. Examples development of times such a mechanism or mechanisms which will be published as Standards-track RFC(s). RFC 3315 also does not provide any guidance about when a client may have host might use an Information-request message to obtain updated configuration parameters when the host has moved to a new link include: o The client reboots. o link. The client dhc WG is physically connected to reviewing a wired connection. o The client returns from sleep mode. o The client using related document, "Detection of Network Attachment (DNA) in IPv4" [8], which describes how a wireless technology changes access points. In any situation host using IPv4 can determine when a client may have moved to use DHCPv4. Either the dhc WG or a new link, WG formed from the client initiates an Information-request/Reply message exchange. dna BOF will undertake development of a similar document for IPv6.
- [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-03.txt pu… Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateless-03.tx… Bernie Volz