[dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00

"Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)" <ghalwasi@cisco.com> Thu, 24 May 2012 15:03 UTC

Return-Path: <ghalwasi@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 8891321F8675 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2012 08:03:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1MRDzlgBXskU for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2012 08:03:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bgl-iport-1.cisco.com (bgl-iport-1.cisco.com [72.163.197.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5802E21F8649 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 08:03:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=ghalwasi@cisco.com; l=9779; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337871808; x=1339081408; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:from:to; bh=cYOZhoe2UtqRSlk7wDXYraopHLaEoTwX3SOpbsoSGiY=; b=G+bOLb7V4mTiMRMK3W99EmhRo8WKbk6dynsr1QOhC5l8uHtvCTw4F5j7 KHMn2fjM816IzRpbGDnX2iQ8T36LRQH+5XOx4SjmXax4xmoioRXztHg3m LFuceCLpT//p47Yk0GQkoXG3GUpNCT9YqD+eO9uPLL8SD6mMxqhTXtqWu 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhcFAFFMvk9Io8UY/2dsb2JhbABDgkWoTQGKPIIXAQQSAQkRA1sBKgYYB1cBBAsQEweHawuaD4EooAKPP2ADiD2Naox9gWSCcg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.75,651,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="12938185"
Received: from vla196-nat.cisco.com (HELO bgl-core-1.cisco.com) ([72.163.197.24]) by bgl-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 May 2012 15:03:26 +0000
Received: from xbh-bgl-412.cisco.com (xbh-bgl-412.cisco.com [72.163.129.202]) by bgl-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4OF3Qqq018377 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 15:03:26 GMT
Received: from xmb-bgl-41e.cisco.com ([72.163.129.220]) by xbh-bgl-412.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 24 May 2012 20:33:26 +0530
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD39BE.5E8250D2"
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 20:33:25 +0530
Message-ID: <3CF88B99A9ED504197498BC6F6F04B81069F01D7@XMB-BGL-41E.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
Thread-Index: Ac05uKdEL2fp8FLMS7ymS5aexC6oDg==
From: "Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)" <ghalwasi@cisco.com>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 May 2012 15:03:26.0134 (UTC) FILETIME=[5ED72560:01CD39BE]
Subject: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-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: Thu, 24 May 2012 15:03:34 -0000

I have read this informational draft and I have couple of comments so
far.

 

1.)Section 3.1

   Replace Section 17.1.3
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00#se
ction-17.1.3> : (existing errata)
 
 
      The client MUST ignore any Advertise message that includes a
Status
      Code option containing the value NoAddrsAvail, with the exception
      that the client MAY display the associated status message to the
      user.
 
   With:
 
 
      The client MUST ignore any IAs in an Advertise message that
      includes a Status Code option containing the value NoAddrsAvail,
      with the exception that the client MAY display the associated
      status message to the user. An Advertise message without any IA
      options MUST be ignored.

 

Is this only applicable to IA_NA.? I guess in case client sends SOLICIT
with both IA_NA and IA_PD. Then in that case I guess we should mention
"NoPrefixAvail" as well.
 
2.) Section 3.6
   Proposed solution: the client should keep a single session with the
   server.  The client should continue with the IA_ options received,
   while continuing to request the other IA options in subsequent
   messages to the server.  That means continue to include the empty
   unanswered IAs in subsequent Renew and Rebind messages.
 
I believe, it is possible that a particular server is willing to offer
only a subset of IA_'s which has been requested. In that case, what's
the use of including the other IA_ in the subsequent renew/rebind. As in
this case server will anyway only renew only one IA_. ? Are we
suggesting that a client at any given point of time should only be
talking to one server after the advertise is accepted.