Re: [dhcwg] What sorts of services does DHCP configure?

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 17 October 2013 04:00 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B7A11E8225 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:00:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.591
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.591 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4yyeIqSLbGOw for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og117.obsmtp.com (exprod7og117.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04DD611E8159 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob117.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUl9g17ClbtEeguwOD3AJ4wt9GAV38+V8@postini.com; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:00:23 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E7471B82CE for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:00:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8291919005C; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:00:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:00:23 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1812\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AD499E3@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 00:00:19 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <6B818FA6-79AD-41DA-93C0-47556DFD18E7@nominum.com>
References: <0CAF13FF2DE695F55BFEEB8BD88E542A@thehobsons.co.uk> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1AD1E42C@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AD49863@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <8E7FD62B-550F-4A71-AF31-1B2DCB53AF0F@nominum.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AD499E3@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
To: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1812)
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10]
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org WG" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] What sorts of services does DHCP configure?
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 17 Oct 2013 04:00:32 -0000

On Oct 16, 2013, at 11:55 PM, Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com> wrote:
> Taking a more specific example, "Distributing Address Selection Policy using DHCPv6", draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-opt. For now, this draft only propagates generic address selection policy. It is little controversy to be DHCPv6 configuration, in my eyes.

It's pretty clear to me that this option is not a very good idea in most cases.   I don't think the DHC working group is in a position to say no to it, but we are certainly in a position to say "this isn't a good general solution to the source address selection problem."

Of course, there are constrained environments where it may make sense—e.g., in a PE router<->CE router situation.  But this is not something that ought to be enabled on all DHCP clients.