Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org> Mon, 20 August 2012 09:02 UTC
Return-Path: <ichiroumakino@gmail.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 9AB2C21F86C5 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.046
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.253, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 XFBoPvini1OC for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ey0-f172.google.com (mail-ey0-f172.google.com [209.85.215.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 633B721F869E for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eaai11 with SMTP id i11so1766862eaa.31 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=4DEFVqgHGS4d/V99seWyMuB+XckYP/J7zNGIuaV40k0=; b=Kw+yH4f2TeeGXUrYCDIy+IcJm/frLO731lHhvl7wH2+k9xsxzDfw9xGE7YrtcHu1vN sJ+Iq3g1eWlM0hf8VEfn+6ygQyTlA3d523aR5opothTeAPQCQg0K5ETu8bnpdNGHGMR7 Q/xGdbHILlujVI8YJLglpsPeOkOSYyrY5Xj1it27YnNre3+rmHIuO+3qoX1CEI2Ki1nz KfP20pdnfAnqYjaCS105JxetJnJP8vzjbNR/A2X8/EvzTN8Y9m4L8YOfUp0RcoPtules auxvtMCj78CwPOgHxmSidh8z30FRwNLJoQYUzZZvBYxgXh3LML82+7IK+rMhQvazKX6K aGSg==
Received: by 10.14.175.7 with SMTP id y7mr7757439eel.29.1345453323581; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-lys01-vla250-10-147-112-132.cisco.com (64-103-25-233.cisco.com. [64.103.25.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z6sm40007860eeo.6.2012.08.20.02.02.01 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Ole Troan <ichiroumakino@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_31E2CFE2-1DBE-46CC-B6D6-EAF376E88FB7"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <93E6DE37-FD02-42BC-B4E9-DF0BBCD06C02@nominum.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:02:01 +0200
Message-Id: <74DBBDC4-9827-4141-AB37-AE9256ACFF15@employees.org>
References: <0AE8374B-0E04-48FF-B71D-2EE8FAAC9ED1@nominum.com> <93E6DE37-FD02-42BC-B4E9-DF0BBCD06C02@nominum.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
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: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:02:06 -0000
Ted, > Not wearing my chair hat, I support what this draft is trying to do. However, the draft makes a decision to unify the state machines of the IA_NA and IA_PD maintenance process. We've had some discussions about this with customers, and one question that came up was whether it might make sense to have different DHCP servers answering IA_NA and IA_PD requests. Obviously this is not possible if the transaction can't be split. > > Have the authors considered this issue? Any opinions on the topic? > > The reason for the potential separation is that in some cases the business logic involved in delegating prefixes may be different than the logic used to allocate addresses. Keeping the two functions separate enables significant additional flexibility when provisioning CPE devices. This draft, if it were to progress in its current state, would rule out any such flexibility. This is not an absolute deal breaker for me, but I wanted to raise the issue and see if anybody else has thought about this. yes, we have talked about this issue. this draft clarifies correct protocol behaviour when multiple stateful options are present. I suppose it implicitly recommends one single DHCP session for multiple stateful options, but I don't think the text prohibits using multiple sessions either. that would be a choice the client could make, given the set of ADVERTISE messages received. could we go forward with this draft that clarifies how multiple stateful options work in a single session, and with the general assumption that a client will choose one DHCP server and that server is authoritative? then have separate specifications for how clients should behave in a multi-domain / separate session scenario if there is interest for that? cheers, Ole
- [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issu… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Wes Beebee (wbeebee)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Hemant Singh (shemant)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Wes Beebee (wbeebee)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Hemant Singh (shemant)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Hemant Singh (shemant)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Hemant Singh (shemant)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-… Hemant Singh (shemant)