IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] L2RA Clarification

"Wojciech Dec (wdec)" <wdec@cisco.com> Wed, 25 March 2009 21:51 UTC

Return-Path: <wdec@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AA423A6D98 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 14:51:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.750, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dNILSgtNDM6n for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 14:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 437263A6B3A for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 14:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.38,421,1233532800"; d="scan'208,217"; a="36818848"
Received: from ams-dkim-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.138]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 25 Mar 2009 21:52:03 +0000
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n2PLq3DQ018153; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:52:03 +0100
Received: from xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-332.cisco.com [144.254.231.87]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2PLq3UC024240; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:52:03 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-33b.cisco.com ([144.254.231.86]) by xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:52:03 +0100
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_01C9AD93.EE99702C"
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:51:59 +0100
Message-ID: <D9872168DBD43A41BD71FFC4713274D406BCD36A@xmb-ams-33b.emea.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <986DCE2E44129444B6435ABE8C9E424D02F28AAD@SGSINSMBS02.ad4.ad.alcatel.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: L2RA Clarification
Thread-Index: AcmtkN8Q7tQ91VCKRaG+HTVgQKu36AAAuXuQ
References: <986DCE2E44129444B6435ABE8C9E424D02F28AAD@SGSINSMBS02.ad4.ad.alcatel.com>
From: "Wojciech Dec (wdec)" <wdec@cisco.com>
To: MILES DAVID <David.Miles@alcatel-lucent.com.au>, dhcwg@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Mar 2009 21:52:03.0553 (UTC) FILETIME=[EED56510:01C9AD93]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=6168; t=1238017923; x=1238881923; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim1002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=wdec@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Wojciech=20Dec=20(wdec)=22=20<wdec@cisco.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20L2RA=20Clarification |Sender:=20; bh=Wb6Pk/4ds2lkkchGt3TGKetgCwaChrbEexZRYsnjg3E=; b=ie9DJeXCC8z0B6bov785FAofI/thmAXdYAG9pjmGG+574RL8EYxrqrRi/4 UGuIqq9VMiqx9giEiaeLwIswDUqx/VVElTNPq0Avgr0RAqprO0X9qF1L94Sa EyVh00twyC;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=wdec@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; );
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] L2RA Clarification
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:51:15 -0000

Agreed. I was reading
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-l2ra-extensions-01 during the
preso. Got no issues with draft-ietf-dhc-l2ra-03 
 
-Woj.


________________________________

	From: MILES DAVID [mailto:David.Miles@alcatel-lucent.com.au] 
	Sent: 25 March 2009 14:30
	To: Wojciech Dec (wdec); dhcwg@ietf.org
	Subject: L2RA Clarification
	
	

	Woj,

	 

	I just checked the draft-ietf-dhc-l2ra-03 and there is nothing
in this draft I can see that is new/not per current implementation.

	 

	The Relay Agent Information Option (RFC 3046) is commonly known
as Option-82. It is not the option described in
draft-ietf-l2ra-extensions-01: this extensions draft defines a Relay
Agent Hardware Address which may be what you were thinking of.

	 

	This would lead me to ask the WG whether this we can progress
last call pending Woj's comments? Unfortunately the original agenda
linked the l2ra-extenions draft by mistake.

	 

	Cheers,

	 

	David Miles

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email