IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC for draft-ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6-02 - Respond by May 18

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Fri, 02 May 2014 16:43 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76D621A08DE for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 May 2014 09:43:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 pE7wmhd4l1FP for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 May 2014 09:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com (mail-wi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578C81A6F64 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 May 2014 09:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f171.google.com with SMTP id hm4so2654436wib.4 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 02 May 2014 09:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=O9auUreSc8E+6gHSZLfuZ8TkLt30tAoK+lVOQgAJA80=; b=Ms7RUNNG7NP85DfdZvL3RjrfM9YfTeDQVyQJ5xhBwRyDDzZpsAMQ2Z7dn7h5aPngD+ 6MnZUeAL7X19QpV7/P4U2HXoDd3/fUKx+HHBALvVn1yYvcM8QSFQbSXXyPlzZUOzZNR8 gjvkY6eZr2VbKwyBC1/6Kfbf+BK1+jyWZoY2fRFgrURTX925ZbMgoWqQb81fMOF4RxWC 7+8/+rBV6LJtLydjsR3bFUebxTqpkCE+NOj8P9UYeJPPRIlS3nU7gGCWN2kniH0vM/oE Ta6Z4YVtpQsriPZOL6Bqb69HlOIoSiISc5n+9t7BZgsb8Y4vWohgEp3onYIHuQFS4jue fdKw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.187.111 with SMTP id fr15mr3699832wic.57.1399048997545; Fri, 02 May 2014 09:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.3.14 with HTTP; Fri, 2 May 2014 09:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4F2473AB-E8F7-4620-874C-3DCA59E70DE5@gmail.com>
References: <535FEDAD.5010103@gmail.com> <CAJE_bqen37j5UCsKZj6syVyvk2Xed4V_xGp-t4xY8shjmS+H5g@mail.gmail.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B008430@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <4F2473AB-E8F7-4620-874C-3DCA59E70DE5@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2014 09:43:17 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: AyrcjYJslwBEqGrw0Oig_L2gUwg
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqcDS6FKRdt3BSDbATqkf+esyQXAFFnC00RYQ1GDBz2ZHA@mail.gmail.com>
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/8IL6qSA_VQgoLx2aD1RXO59bTmI
Cc: dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC for draft-ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6-02 - Respond by May 18
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 02 May 2014 16:43:21 -0000

At Fri, 2 May 2014 09:18:11 -0400,
Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> If I recall correctly, similar protocols have been considered in the past for DHCPv4.  Those protocols were not developed because of concerns about the length of individual options and the total length of all of the options (certs can get big) combined with concerns about whether deployed DHCPv4 infrastructure (relay agents) would correctly handle large DHCPv4 messages.

Okay, thanks for the clarification, and I agree with the following point:

> I would like to see some consideration of the total length of DHCPv6 messages that use this security protocol included in the document.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email