Re: [dhcwg] WGLC for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-03 - Respond by Dec 9, 2013

<ian.farrer@telekom.de> Thu, 28 November 2013 07:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ian.farrer@telekom.de>
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 C26E41AE167 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:28:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] 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 ZnYvk6ElPX3o for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:28:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tcmail43.telekom.de (tcmail43.telekom.de [80.149.113.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60C831AE166 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:28:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from he113656.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.99.16]) by tcmail41.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 28 Nov 2013 08:28:29 +0100
Received: from HE111643.EMEA1.CDS.T-INTERNAL.COM ([10.134.93.12]) by HE113656.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.99.16]) with mapi; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:28:28 +0100
From: <ian.farrer@telekom.de>
To: <volz@cisco.com>, <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>, <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:28:34 +0100
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] WGLC for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-03 - Respond by Dec 9, 2013
Thread-Index: Ac7sC27FaFr9M80rSoeB8BYOw5JWzQ==
Message-ID: <CEBCAEF4.9DB34%ian.farrer@telekom.de>
In-Reply-To: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1ADC24C4@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913
acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-03 - Respond by Dec 9, 2013
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: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 07:28:33 -0000

+1. Definitely prefer a single option for this.

Ian




On 27/11/2013 20:24, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> wrote:

>I had suggested (perhaps privately) that at least in my mind, having a
>single option would be so much better.
>
>The option can return a list of N IPv6 addresses where N can be 0.
>
>If the option is returned with no IPv6 addresses, then it means enabled
>but with standard multicast.
>
>If the option is returned with one or more addresses, then it means sent
>to those addresses (whether unicast or multicast - why does the sender
>care).
>
>If the option is NOT returned, it means that the service is disabled.
>
>Now, one issue against this is that it may be a bit unusual for servers
>to support an option with 0 or more IPv6 addresses? If that is a problem
>for a particular server, then one possibility is just configure it with
>one address - the All_DHCP_Relay_Agents_and_Servers. (I don't see a
>reason to prohibit this value from being included; it just isn't required
>as it can be implied by sending no addresses.)
>
>- Bernie