RE: [dhcwg] Implementation problem

"Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se> Mon, 24 September 2001 22:55 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02981; Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:55:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA10383; Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:54:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA10315 for <dhcwg@ns.ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:54:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imr2.ericy.com (imr2.ericy.com [12.34.240.68]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02966 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2001 18:54:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mr6.exu.ericsson.se (mr6att.ericy.com [138.85.92.14]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f8OMsMQ11609 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2001 17:54:22 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se (eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.133.37]) by mr6.exu.ericsson.se (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f8OMsMW19032 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2001 17:54:22 -0500 (CDT)
Received: FROM eamrcnt761.exu.ericsson.se BY eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se ; Mon Sep 24 17:43:30 2001 -0500
Received: by eamrcnt761.exu.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <THQPQXPF>; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:51:35 -0500
Message-ID: <66F66129A77AD411B76200508B65AC697B3653@eambunt705.ena-east.ericsson.se>
From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>
To: "'Jim Bound'" <seamus@bit-net.com>, "Guja, ArturX" <ArturX.Guja@intel.com>
Cc: "Dhcwg (E-mail)" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] Implementation problem
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:51:34 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1438F.384D2A10"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org

My understanding is that the server always provides a fully specified 128-bit IPv6 address.

If we ever want to just assign prefixes, we always can define a new option for that purpose.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Bound [mailto:seamus@bit-net.com]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:55 PM
To: Guja, ArturX
Cc: Dhcwg (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Implementation problem


We have gone back and forth on this.  I am assuming we are now at the
state where you use it as-is?  I believe that was consensus of last round?
If we don't do this it gets too complicated to finish this spec for last
call.  In the future we can extend address types and scenarios.  


/jim


On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Guja, ArturX wrote:

> Can a client get ANY address from the available pools, 
> or does it only get a prefix to be filled with its interface identifier?
> 
> Or, is it the server's duty to make sure, that the addresses passed
> to the client are of the form:
> prefix + interface ID
> If so, the server could take the interface ID of the client from the
> client's
> link local address (if it still gets it, I'm not sure after all the changes
> here).
> 
> Does the client check the addresses' structure, or does it assign those
> addresses to its interfaces on an "AS IS" principle?
> 
> Artur G.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> 


_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg