Re: [dhcwg] Question on relay agent behavior in DHCPv6 prefix delegation

On Feb 3, 2014, at 5:01 PM 2/3/14, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:

> Hi Ralph,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ralph Droms [mailto:rdroms.ietf@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 11:57 AM
>> To: Templin, Fred L
>> Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org WG; Andre Kostur; Lemon Ted
>> Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Question on relay agent behavior in DHCPv6 prefix delegation
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 3, 2014, at 2:41 PM 2/3/14, Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Feb 3, 2014, at 1:10 PM, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
>>>> But, are there any more recent publications
>>>> that have either attempted or succeeded in specifying a standard method?
>>> 
>>> I can't think of any.
>> 
>> "DHCP Relay Agent Assignment Notification Option" <draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-agentopt-delegate>, R.
>> Droms, B. Volz, O. Troan
>> 
>> 1.  Introduction
>> 
>>   The DHCP Relay Agent Assignment Notification option encapsulates
>>   address and prefix options to indicate that an address or prefix has
>>   been assigned.  The option may also carry other information required
>>   by the network element for configuration related to the assigned
>>   address or prefix.
>> 
>>   For example, a network administrator uses the DHCP Relay Agent
>>   Assignment Notification option to inform a relay agent of a prefix
>>   that has been delegated through DHCP PD to a DHCP client.  The relay
>>   agent notifies the network element on which the it is implemented of
>>   the delegation information so the network element can add routing
>>   information about the delegated prefix into the appropriate routing
>>   protocols.
>> 
>> The dhc WG discussed the idea and decided not to take on the work due to some fundamental issues in
>> using the option reliably; e.g., ensuring that all DHCPv6 messages were relayed through the device
>> that was actually interested in configuring itself for the delegated prefix.
> 
> Thanks, I think I remember this now. I now have a use case where it is
> possible to ensure that all DHCPv6 messages are relayed through the same
> device. Would it make sense to revive this work and try again?

I can't speak for the WG.  I recommend you review the discussion of the previous draft in detail and be sure to address the issues raised there...

> 
>> The idea was to formalize what is now accomplished through snooping.
> 
> Is this kind of snooping for the purpose of routing system manipulation
> seen in common practice today?

Cisco implements snooping.  I can't say how widely it is used.

- Ralph

> 
> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
> 
>> - Ralph
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dhcwg mailing list
>>> dhcwg@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> 