Re: [dhcwg] Advancing RFC 3315 and RFC 3633 to Internet Standard

Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Mon, 23 September 2013 13:56 UTC

Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@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 0794121F9FCA for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 06:56:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 llJKOBOtQ9FR for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 06:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ee0-x233.google.com (mail-ee0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CC4821F9FC3 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 06:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ee0-f51.google.com with SMTP id c1so1761675eek.10 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 06:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zObl/vAjSA6fAwsOqkbrnt6OLp7GCo45Pi6xAFEEl6w=; b=Nvz1llIMDWPPgbt4Fdi/gBntEd5lbi9B06HVvMJAbLDg+geO5WiY/ny4SuGwvEeTKx H17Hs+JVf7kFJcpP1cdkjDQaNV9UmFUOjZGMzn41QHE5rfHdYKwE8nQQvfXSzKgEvCcV kRgVYmfnShrxaUny9lshDgLj+SFcy2fSBu+a8hObE4kwf2BaM6qW/c+y1alDzmVGxkzv qhakQDVOR7e8UAIfZ9woV5XqZoLQfjRPO+RmnppR9NkBplyAcLYckh7zOHZVbKkVae8V 4o2MvW92XQozVADhvKQPW8Xa070HmUGUf0A2/F7BbPDg56HlECWZqWOuSmdlI5ysS8yr TNvw==
X-Received: by 10.14.241.74 with SMTP id f50mr37569171eer.29.1379944563099; Mon, 23 Sep 2013 06:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.100] (host-109-107-11-157.ip.jarsat.pl. [109.107.11.157]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id z12sm42328908eev.6.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Sep 2013 06:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5240486E.20501@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 15:55:58 +0200
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130803 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
References: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E18654EE6@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <5212694A.6000807@gmail.com> <CAOv0Pi87akb24PaYJKPzK3+cfCr1DHDu-h2sF3HwTxBvzZC9+w@mail.gmail.com> <C2A9B74C-A52C-4605-824E-40E3E9C190E0@gmail.com> <52305986.2010503@gmail.com>, <FB56FE0A-9088-4040-BCE7-C69399D64171@employees.org> <ECD231FD-8D3F-4067-8BDE-AE567D96F6A7@cisco.com> <52306010.4090001@gmail.com> <5E91E9B8-6E22-46DD-A687-B4983BD0B508@gmail.com> <523f2fa3.c9ed440a.55a9.ffffc38e@mx.google.com> <52402AF3.8010407@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52402AF3.8010407@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6
X-TagToolbar-Keys: D20130923155558860
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Advancing RFC 3315 and RFC 3633 to Internet Standard
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, 23 Sep 2013 13:56:05 -0000

On 23.09.2013 13:50, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> Le 22/09/2013 19:57, Leaf Yeh a écrit :
>> Ralph > The piece of network equipment that implements the relay agent
>> routes, and that network equipment *might* also need a route.
>>
>> On the PE router implementing relay for DHCPv6-PD, it always needs add
>> the
>> associated route for the CE's network of delegated prefix.
>> I can't see *might* here.
> 
> I agree with the doubt.  I don't see a might, but rather a must.
> Otherwise it doesn't work.
> 
> But maybe I dont understand the word 'might' as a native speaker could
> hear it.
Relay agent is functionality that can be provided by a piece of
software. You can run it on any box that is connected to more than one
network. Although typically such a box serves as a router, it doesn't
have to.

Ralph speaks about a generic case (any device that runs relay agent
software) and Leaf thinks about specific one (PE router). Hence the
confusion.

Tomek