Re: [dhcwg] RFC3315bis - Naming

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Mon, 03 March 2014 11:16 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@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 E06131A0F17 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 03:16:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.983
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham
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 ks2eyoMKDHQq for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 03:16:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953701A0CC6 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 03:16:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s23BFjhj013354; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:15:45 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id A5E01201B6D; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:16:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A7C201B84; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:16:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.86.11]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s23BFeuo026897; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 12:15:45 +0100
Message-ID: <5314645C.5080409@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 12:15:40 +0100
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Leaf Yeh <leaf.yeh.sdo@gmail.com>, "'Ole Troan'" <otroan@employees.org>, "'DHC WG'" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
References: <AF7019CB-8EEB-4E43-A5B0-4863D763B0E2@employees.org> <53145317.a1a1c20a.65c6.7639@mx.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <53145317.a1a1c20a.65c6.7639@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/D9E3w-qgoBwOeWhpVnWcEWiSGUU
Cc: "'Ralph Droms \(rdroms\)'" <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] RFC3315bis - Naming
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: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 11:16:19 -0000

Le 03/03/2014 11:01, Leaf Yeh a écrit :
> ...rfc3633 requesting router and delegating router...
>
> Ole - I don't see a new to maintain the separate terms. just use
> client, relay and server.

In a sense yes, I also agree with this, the discussion would be easier
if we just had Client, Relay and Server.

But I have a doubt about other RFCs using Requesting Router and
Delegating Router? (e.g. RFC6276 Prefix Delegation for NEMO, the queued
draft-ietf-netext-pd-pmip-14, and others).  People reading these may no
longer understand them.

Alex

>
> I support this point. In the scenarios of DHCPv6-PD,
>
> a.  the DHCPv6 server has not always to be a router; b.  the CE
> router can be both a requesting router for requesting a prefix in
> IA_PD, and a client for requesting an address in IA_NA; in fact,
> they use the same message from the same function module, but are in
> different options.
>
>
> Best Regards, Leaf
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: dhcwg
> [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ole Troan Sent: Monday,
> March 03, 2014 9:29 AM To: DHC WG Cc: Ralph Droms (rdroms) Subject:
> [dhcwg] RFC3315bis - Naming
>
> just a perspective on naming and at the risk of bike shedding.
>
> rfc3315 uses client, relay, server rfc3633 requesting router and
> delegating router
>
> rfc3633 was written with the expectation that there was no relay,
> this was for the purpose of route injection. actual deployments use
> relays, and there isn't any special function done on the delegating
> router, and no need to have a special name for it.
>
> in 3315bis with prefix delegation being integrated fully into the
> main DHCP RFC, I don't see a new to maintain the separate terms.
> just use client, relay and server.
>
> cheers, Ole
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>