IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Wed, 15 August 2012 14:00 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 AA9B321F889D for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 JGY97l4KnvKc for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og112.obsmtp.com (exprod7og112.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A1021F889A for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob112.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUCurautAVOaPm4KJ7NDSBZIxuEvePH4M@postini.com; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:11 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 0C0A71B8313 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-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 F01FE190052; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.132]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:00:10 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: "Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)" <ghalwasi@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02
Thread-Index: AQHNePgJ6EjzoGF6j0KwHUjTOoQDGZdXH58ggAAgh9CAAdqGoIAA+BcggACxVgCAAI83gIAAA2iAgAAJQIA=
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:00:09 +0000
Message-ID: <434BDF4B-D6E7-4008-99F7-68B604E3587D@nominum.com>
References: <2DCA645F-CDDF-4311-8417-3A9771AD3F71@nominum.com> <90903C21C73202418A48BFBE80AEE5EB0D028F@xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F0504A@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <90903C21C73202418A48BFBE80AEE5EB0D40AF@xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F060CC@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAL10_BrrHJSrP88q6S3o6YGWmR574djWEuOBowCq5pc8K0-a8Q@mail.gmail.com> <388CD216-17F9-463E-8CDB-F084C9D43C54@nominum.com> <90903C21C73202418A48BFBE80AEE5EB0D55C1@xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <90903C21C73202418A48BFBE80AEE5EB0D55C1@xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_434BDF4BD6E7400899F768B604E3587Dnominumcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>, Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02
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: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:00:12 -0000

On Aug 15, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi) wrote:
Also, may I am missing anything. Why do we think client using “Information-Request” message is inappropriate in this case in comparison to using SOLICIT.?

What would the source address be?

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status