IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-01

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 16 August 2012 17:43 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 6953921F866A for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.559
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 OhDrKSSCop2l for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og124.obsmtp.com (exprod7og124.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5EB621F853E for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:43:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob124.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUC0xMW10ftbHyIhfPADtc/nuoFpsQQSQ@postini.com; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:43:13 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 DA5231B82F9 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:43:12 -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 D020B190052; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:43:12 -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; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:43:12 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Chuck Anderson <cra@WPI.EDU>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-01
Thread-Index: AQHNe7jBKYqvqlvJTk2cfeufL7tTPJddHfOAgAALoQCAAAGIgA==
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 17:43:12 +0000
Message-ID: <0016C6A9-CD91-4A4C-8303-8A53A45C8AF4@nominum.com>
References: <A87A2CCB-21D2-4437-9021-11013FB8218E@nominum.com> <CAAed6vtYx4g+C1PAWBFQF1aPAx-=PCE2YREnaNDSMYcgAY69_A@mail.gmail.com> <20120816173740.GD4612@angus.ind.WPI.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <20120816173740.GD4612@angus.ind.WPI.EDU>
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: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <8C9AE0D1EF2A0848BF39ABB39402F035@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-01
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, 16 Aug 2012 17:43:14 -0000

Chuck, I think I can read your response as saying that you are happy with the draft as it is, and while you would not oppose having the draft say how the DHCP server might acquire the link local address for a packet that arrived without being relayed, you don't think it's necessary or desirable, correct?   (I ask only so that we will know what to do later on when we evaluate consensus).

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status