Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08.txt

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Sun, 12 June 2011 20:03 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32ED211E8130 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:03:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v25A3ZAroPaz for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF9B711E80E9 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jun 2011 13:03:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=volz@cisco.com; l=4193; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1307909035; x=1309118635; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:cc; bh=NEDrdGz+xr/iRfjoj6nF3/iPDh6nW8xCk1PeVI8LUYQ=; b=MdVLoygkiuze0yEcoSsQ0S2SGK860bFaHFIeTBAE8nZY2emtEiz6zacH LVei88XsLpJ2Go1twvbhgoUbstZqtP306lQzIJXZ9ZmWLQSWZr2XnQV6n Du1NNPuOE5OMAbpInSgzObcxCYfJ+Y0+ZDw6XW4WsUCdwpcxjGq8nlntb c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhcBAPga9U2tJV2a/2dsb2JhbABSl1eOeHeqbZx8hiQEhw2Of4sj
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,355,1304294400"; d="scan'208";a="464092214"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Jun 2011 20:03:55 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com [72.163.62.139]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p5CK3tWd003897; Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:03:55 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-101.cisco.com ([72.163.62.143]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:03:55 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:03:51 -0500
Message-ID: <D9B5773329187548A0189ED65036678907F8BE68@XMB-RCD-101.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <31D55C4D55BEED48A4459EB64567589A115E3C9F2B@BLRKECMBX02.ad.infosys.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08.txt
Thread-Index: Acwi2YMzGEKrsYkCTqOR+0a/a2b14QEgKCViAHfPjsA=
References: <20110604170424.3363.68771.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <31D55C4D55BEED48A4459EB64567589A115E3C9F2B@BLRKECMBX02.ad.infosys.com>
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: Bharat Joshi <bharat_joshi@infosys.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jun 2011 20:03:55.0054 (UTC) FILETIME=[DB92C4E0:01CC293B]
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org, "Mark Stapp (mjs)" <mjs@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08.txt
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:03:57 -0000

Hi ... I've decided to add the DHC WG as this is a document being worked
on there.

Personally, I'd switch section 3.1 and 3.2 (bulk LQ is a much stronger
argument for this). 

And, I doubt the IESG will be happy with this document and leaving the
actual identifier as completely opaque!  How would this identifying data
be assured to be unique if it is just defined as a 'series of octets'?

I also fail to see why the DUID isn't being recommended as the standard
format for this relay identifier? See RFC 5460 section 5.4,
OPTION_RELAY_ID.

And, thus do we really need a type field in the option? Isn't just a
DUID sufficient?

I'd also say that for "compatibility" with DHCPv6, using the DUID as the
relay identifier too would be really convenient and appropriate. This
also means section 6 can probably be significantly scaled back - the
only issue is the unicast RENEW.

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Bharat Joshi [mailto:bharat_joshi@infosys.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2011 6:36 AM
To: Bernie Volz (volz)
Subject: FW: [dhcwg] I-D Action:
draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08.txt

Bernie,

      Mark told me that you had reviewed this draft and had provided
valuable inputs.

      We have made quiet a few changes from the last revision. Can you
please review this new revision and send any comments to DHC mailing
list?

      We need this draft for our 'DHCPv4 Bulk lease query' draft.

Thanks in advance,
Bharat
________________________________________
From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
internet-drafts@ietf.org [internet-drafts@ietf.org]
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 10:34 PM
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories. This draft is a work item of the Dynamic Host Configuration
Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : The DHCPv4 Relay Agent Identifier Suboption
        Author(s)       : Bharat Joshi
                          Mark Stapp
        Filename        : draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08.txt
        Pages           : 8
        Date            : 2011-06-04

   This draft defines a new Relay Agent Identifier suboption for the
   Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol&#39;s (DHCP) Relay Agent
Information
   option.  The suboption carries a value that uniquely identifies the
   relay agent device within the administrative domain.  The value is
   typically administratively-configured in the relay agent.  The
   suboption allows a DHCP relay agent to include the identifier in the
   DHCP messages it sends.


A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08
.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-relay-id-suboption-08.
txt
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

**************** CAUTION - Disclaimer *****************
This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended
solely 
for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient,
please 
notify the sender by e-mail and delete the original message. Further,
you are not 
to copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any
other person and 
any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infosys
has taken 
every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for
any damage 
you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should
carry out your 
own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys
reserves the 
right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from
this e-mail 
address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on
the 
Infosys e-mail system.
***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS***