[dhcwg] Re: WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsconfig-02.txt

Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> Thu, 06 February 2003 18:01 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28422 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:01:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h16I8Si20263 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:08:28 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h16I8Sp20260 for <dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:08:28 -0500
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28397 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:01:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h16I6Xp19491; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:06:34 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h16945p13534 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 04:04:05 -0500
Received: from netcore.fi (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA09034 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 03:57:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h1690df18991; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 11:00:39 +0200
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 11:00:38 +0200
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
cc: dhcwg@ietf.org, ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20030205160932.051c5948@funnel.cisco.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302061049360.18345-100000@netcore.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Subject: [dhcwg] Re: WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsconfig-02.txt
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Ralph Droms wrote:
> DHCPv6" <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6 opt-dnsconfig-02.txt>.  The last call will 
> conclude on Friday, 2/21.
> 
> Note that this is a parallel WG last call in the dhc, ipv6 and dnsext WGs.
> 
> draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6 opt-dnsconfig-02.txt describes two options for
> DHCPv6: the Domain Name Server option and the Domain Search List option.  
> This document is being considered for Proposed Standard as an extension
> to the base DHCPv6 specification, and is available as
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsconfig-02.txt

A few comments; I haven't looked too deep into DHCPv6 to be able to 
comment on those parts, but there are some definite need for revisal in 
the doc..:

2. Requirements

   The key words MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,
   [...]

==> I'd put these under Introduction or Terminology sections, no use 
having a separate section with a questionable title.

   option-length: Length of the 'options' field in octets; must be a
      multiple of 16

==> 'options' field has not been defined.  Is it the whole option or just
the length of DNS-server address options (I assume so)?  If the former,
there must be 32 bits of zero padding.  Is it ok that the options aren't 
64-bit aligned?

   The list of domain names in the 'searchstring' MUST be encoded as
   specified in section "Representation and use of domain names" of the
   DHCPv6 specification [4].

==> I didn't bother to check, but I guess this document also defines how 
to pad the names to get some desired level of alignment?

6. Appearance of these options

   The Domain Name Server option MUST appear only in the following
   messages: Solicit, Advertise, Request, Confirm, Renew, Rebind, 
   Information-Request, Reply.

   The Domain Search List option MUST appear only in the following
   messages: Solicit, Advertise, Request, Confirm, Renew, Rebind, 
   Information-Request, Reply.


==> I would reword these differently, like:

 The Domain Name Server option MUST NOT appear in other than the following 
messages: ....

==> is it ok to server to give only one of these options but not the 
other?

References

==> split the references

   [4]  Bound, J., Carney, M., Perkins, C., Lemon, T., Volz, B. and R.
        Droms (ed.), "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6
        (DHCPv6)", draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-23 (work in progress), February
        2002.

==> update this draft version

Author's Address

   Ralph Droms (ed.)

==> the author is an editor, but the draft does not have acknowledgements 
or contributors section.  Just remove Editor if nobody else contributed to 
the document.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg