Re: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption: draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt-08

Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> Tue, 04 September 2012 06:45 UTC

Return-Path: <xuxiaohu@huawei.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 BD80921F8512 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Sep 2012 23:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XlzMBlpuJMPo for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Sep 2012 23:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B5A21F84FD for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Sep 2012 23:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AKI18064; Tue, 04 Sep 2012 06:45:52 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 07:45:08 +0100
Received: from SZXEML426-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.72.61.34) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 14:45:51 +0800
Received: from SZXEML525-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.168]) by szxeml426-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.72.61.34]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 4 Sep 2012 14:44:51 +0800
From: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
To: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Call for Adoption: draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt-08
Thread-Index: AQHNgg2f2GWemYRp/0G7NT9hbKcz65d5ysHwgAACCaA=
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 06:44:52 +0000
Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE07555FC6@szxeml525-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <91484F36-D059-4D90-8BFE-60434864A579@nominum.com> <E1CE3E6E6D4E1C438B0ADC9FFFA345EA3C46980E@SZXEML510-MBS.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <E1CE3E6E6D4E1C438B0ADC9FFFA345EA3C46980E@SZXEML510-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.24]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption: draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt-08
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: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 06:45:56 -0000

Support.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Ted Lemon
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 11:32 PM
> To: dhcwg@ietf.org WG
> Subject: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption: draft-yeh-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt-08
> 
> The authors have proposed that the working group adopt the prefix pool option
> draft as a working group item.   We have engaged in some correspondence
> with participants in the Routing Area, and while some helpful advice was given,
> no objections were raised to going forward with the work, and it's a DHCP
> protocol extension, so it makes sense for it to happen in the DHC working
> group.
> 
> The document proposes an extension to the DHCP protocol that allows the
> DHCP server to communicate prefixes to the provider edge router when doing
> prefix delegation, such that this router can advertise a route to an aggregate
> prefix, rather than to many individual prefixes, and so that this router does not
> have to perform ad-hoc prefix aggregation, which may produce less optimal
> results.
> 
> If you think this work should be adopted by the working group, please reply to
> this message saying so.   If you think this work should not be adopted by the
> working group, please reply to this message saying so.   We will evaluate
> consensus on September 7.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg