[dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 WGLC Issue - Simplify Reconfigure
"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 08 September 2016 02:10 UTC
Return-Path: <volz@cisco.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 14DC912B404 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2016 19:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.028
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.028 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.508, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 eoB5Ot1UngBk for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Sep 2016 19:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1358812B012 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Sep 2016 19:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=10827; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1473300637; x=1474510237; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=cu4WAhkayfyRNzMP7xDq1IwZMQMjnzZIIP/Usay1uOI=; b=lWgOgUQWV2UxasFGDyK3vWPgwlLCVy/mcTEVp6Z4Yh3zicX9OXOpeXBt eYkD/rG3UhAGiQfPXqUOkG8o/mJaxiTyBJEpShqhlgmrYX3XJiP0HmrSa JDdJeIkwCc6s1iOLLtPxGEszxtQCBjX83FH/eNSo/MO3WjVCL/YFFWJNe w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0APAgDsx9BX/4wNJK1TChoBAQEBAgEBAQGCejMBAQEBAR5XfAeNK6YEgn6CD4IDJIYWgU44FAECAQEBAQEBAV4cC4RoI2gBSgIEMCcEiF0OoFSPZowSAQEBAQYBAQEBAQEcBY8VCwEBBQaDEoJaBZQMhU0BhiFyiCmBboReiQ+QSgEeNoJngW1wAYN9gSB/AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,298,1470700800"; d="scan'208,217";a="319986401"
Received: from alln-core-7.cisco.com ([173.36.13.140]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 08 Sep 2016 02:10:35 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (xch-rcd-004.cisco.com [173.37.102.14]) by alln-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u882AZGW019426 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 02:10:35 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) by XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (173.37.102.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 7 Sep 2016 21:10:34 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 7 Sep 2016 21:10:34 -0500
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 WGLC Issue - Simplify Reconfigure
Thread-Index: AQHSCXYvyoR2lY+Fg0CiHtgpb0LIAQ==
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 02:10:34 +0000
Message-ID: <D3F640D8.34506%volz@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.6.160626
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.86.244.43]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D3F640D834506volzciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/4gEv1nDuFgsuHo0JHf4Ieriy9_w>
Subject: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 WGLC Issue - Simplify Reconfigure
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 08 Sep 2016 02:10:39 -0000
Hi: During the WGLC of draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05, I raised an issue about Reconfigure in https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/current/msg17530.html: I'm not sure that the text in section 17.2.11 and 17.1.4 are fully aligned for Reconfigures. 17.2.11's text is a bit unclear in that it says "The server MAY include an ORO" (and then says if it includes IA options in the ORO, it must include the IA options themselves); section 17.1.4 assumes that this is always the case. I'm not sure if a "plain" Reconfigure without any ORO is valid from this as 17.1.4's text doesn't work well then? So, I think we need to clarify this a bit more. (The server I work on just sends a Reconfigure without ORO since we don't provide an administrator any way to say what the client should reconfigure and while I think this was intended to be acceptable behavior, but 17.1.4 needs a tweak to make it work?) In discussing this today, several of the co-authors felt that simplifying the Reconfigure message from the server to NOT have an ORO nor any potential IA_* options as allowed in 17.2.11 (also in 19.1.1 of RFC 3315). Therefore, we propose to REMOVE the following text from 17.2.11 and also adjust 17.1.4 (and elsewhere if needed) to remove any text related to the Reconfigure's ORO/IA options. The server MAY include an Option Request option to inform the client of what information has been changed or new information that has been added. In particular, the server specifies the IA option in the Option Request option if the server wants the client to obtain new address information. If the server identifies the IA option in the Option Request option, the server MUST include an IA option to identify each IA that is to be reconfigured on the client. The IA options included by the server MUST NOT contain any options. However, as this is a change to the existing Reconfigure handling, we want to make sure no one in the WG has an objection to this change. Therefore, please comment within the next week as to whether you either agree or disagree with this change. If you disagree, please let us know why. This is now Ticket 168 - https://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/dhcpv6bis/ticket/168. Thank you! - Bernie (for the 3315bis coauthors)
- [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 WGLC Issue -… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 WGLC Iss… Bernie Volz (volz)