IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Please review version -07 of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Fri, 17 October 2014 17:32 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968971A0067 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1FTnwkoobGKI for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x229.google.com (mail-wi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F2811A004B for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id h11so4671871wiw.0 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=+OoVV2SJlgBukGIPv2mvnFPKE4sCRP09aoFbuwiC3J0=; b=fzjoWekRxdICQBtF5oYHjD+0YJREuFElC7Wov/cyPjoBtDIXbco3/8Pv3NBEU1/73e eKpIneZdyUj0JthnjfYYxuhkxgCJS0qUyQ3Ksbm1HIKFtfZu/Rvd1jX7wG1r/BfdeObk fl4qggHfiyAxNcKvkIEhpqn5ew+XIu0KIB/NS4i+7c9MfVIZ1nOaanVKOcDEeP6v5xD8 /Zm1lF2cOSTCym/1UPx1qLhJmyYWr5qNTHtRr8KA/1NeHtbnr0Z9kQeoLPbqfVWrjHg5 099jKTyOCgweJ887FH0XuG5b5SyQ0Kk8pSYKHXGGn2NFpf8OdWSu0nVNHtvoIRbSiOwB bTPw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.48.116 with SMTP id k20mr12495485wjn.7.1413567167281; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.195.13.83 with HTTP; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B6D1B3A@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
References: <542D1698.7030203@gmail.com> <CAJE_bqcJS45ULDLaGgzgE5ZeS-hFZhWUX4819-T_jObroJnv4Q@mail.gmail.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B6CEE2D@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <CAJE_bqeNyWa=hxyaaDRqUR0zgnfQCSZZOnToXSaSWm0m4CjUYg@mail.gmail.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B6D18F3@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B6D1B3A@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:32:47 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: AE18zK9NTNj12YBPECDVRwhkSXg
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqe4xsP7eHBpvTZsw0VobpMnnG2MvYuMgXvKF+nrUS2yDw@mail.gmail.com>
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
To: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/1ZFDPE9vn6DqVy7PSorEd7Uvq3M
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Please review version -07 of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 17:32:50 -0000

At Thu, 16 Oct 2014 19:08:07 +0000,
"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> wrote:

> If the client sent a Renew and the Reply has 0 lifetimes for EITHER (but not both) the IA_NA or IA_PD. What should the client do?

I've not considered all of the ramifications (and, frankly, I've not
read all of this response closely), this breaks basic operational
assumption (i.e., all lifetimes and T1/T2 should be same for all IAs),
right?  If so, we might rather not try to be perfect but just make
sure that client ends up with a valid state (like having T2 < T1) and
leave other details open.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email