[dhcwg] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-dhc-v6only-05: (with COMMENT)
Martin Duke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 30 July 2020 17:30 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D663A0F9D; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:30:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Martin Duke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dhc-v6only@ietf.org, dhc-chairs@ietf.org, dhcwg@ietf.org, Bernie Volz <volz@cisco.com>, volz@cisco.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.12.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <159613020037.16121.18255534267259771388@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:30:00 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/EsmObz7ACsSiDYgPXGGtZN7Lpnk>
Subject: [dhcwg] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-dhc-v6only-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 30 Jul 2020 17:30:01 -0000
Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dhc-v6only-05: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-v6only/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for addressing my DISCUSS on spoofed long timeouts in the github version. Original comments, since addressed: This seems like an important stepping stone to v6 adoption, so thanks. Sec 3.1 In client-generated messages, what is in the "Value field"? I presume this is one of those "client MUST set to zero and server MUST ignore" cases? Sec 3.3 "If the client then issues a DHCPREQUEST for the address, the server MUST process it per [RFC2131], including replying with a DHCPACK for the address if in the meantime it has not been committed to another client." What if it HAS been committed to another client? What then?
- [dhcwg] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-… Martin Duke via Datatracker