Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcpv4-forcerenew-extensions-02 (Ends May 8, 2016)
Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Wed, 04 May 2016 17:52 UTC
Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 48FB612D957 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 May 2016 10:52:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.611
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.611 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 bMEqFHaaHrlA for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 May 2016 10:52:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22d.google.com (mail-lf0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D12DB12D910 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 May 2016 10:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id m64so69174040lfd.1 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 04 May 2016 10:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=i+zdigK/SFX1JQXHZXIw9nmv2TnZcxhIxxhIk2vgwno=; b=GrD0RMvntZkNblp1ZODXqanqYHG3MQLQNOOhk58RDAjiXWd5VcKk0KsNOmifuIoTcp qXTb1Q39mu3rWddAmW0zmna+EzqxE/xZHaQ7ouUp+52MgKLnqttkWMN1ZOY+4U68Xb8k oiZsd+HTSuUe8TVZPZ2rk3V02Z8jRV16SoqYXuapwMsifwjG3jgb3mKWGiWJ/WjRwwRC EW8oK5blpaH0ecoKPEctyNxk0hJU7J7beTMoWZFapQCWSRD5L+iAeq676nfETO8ddeKv b7ir8rdPBSeYpBPRetMo7ljujn+heXwSGz8PWk/uza0yIrBiIamzVwV5jaHpVQY0+CjR SFrQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=i+zdigK/SFX1JQXHZXIw9nmv2TnZcxhIxxhIk2vgwno=; b=M1URIJpbWEp086EF1YObc8RySUHuq5cTSHz0eh4Ydl+EktO7qF+g4i4n2P4JWlBQ+e 7pbnbjGUep7otCMuofRMwWg9q8IVhkaJTvOMmSt9cTJKe5aeWaHpBVVVX9DrmHRZtUAT YDKL+tdGrTbAGBZ4IbCuE63EOVCzRRW6C40XVseB4LURjpA6+vW9zkA4lWIWHP0s6UP+ 8EOVkr0Y3bt18JRZp8E2Nfu0LAxdpAl0ZMBbSAdeWJ55MSmG9pxYt3FC0jjGIrNqLB8z hoMCY6ouGacfQKsZ3UMOMCOF6/twVr3fT3hfLX69dw2RhWBn3Ix95N0aTC/x5VZvt2dV fmnQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWGXm4u/WKc5B2SLTpsudgMfSWGTaRQDDtgogMDOKbfb4qgfYKzlmRsnbFXRsNXwbRj+9g5LJoQUuX1oA==
X-Received: by 10.112.161.41 with SMTP id xp9mr4588457lbb.133.1462384369444; Wed, 04 May 2016 10:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.213.19 with HTTP; Wed, 4 May 2016 10:52:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9142206A0C5BF24CB22755C8EC422E457A8F7D69@AZ-US1EXMB03.global.avaya.com>
References: <00f1ca4f5ef14b5f9fa2a2cdd587ba25@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <572A2671.4010602@gmail.com> <9142206A0C5BF24CB22755C8EC422E457A8F7D16@AZ-US1EXMB03.global.avaya.com> <CAPt1N1kjT9nfq3w5JpnWuj_w_3480kUmfWAOt7A_e9EMp0OjCQ@mail.gmail.com> <9142206A0C5BF24CB22755C8EC422E457A8F7D69@AZ-US1EXMB03.global.avaya.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 13:52:09 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1=B2EqH=vm6VBaekoXNYdJVv7dvtK07YxsdtkHau8dcfg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)" <dmudric@avaya.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c26b2addc419053207e458"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/G4bwZRMIJc5c3oZVb0T34lQYsV8>
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcpv4-forcerenew-extensions-02 (Ends May 8, 2016)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <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: Wed, 04 May 2016 17:52:57 -0000
It's in the IETF 95 proceedings. On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Mudric, Dusan (Dusan) <dmudric@avaya.com> wrote: > Is there a link to that presentation? Are there problem statements for > cloud deployments? > > > > Thanks, > > Dusan. > > > > *From:* Ted Lemon [mailto:mellon@fugue.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 04, 2016 1:13 PM > *To:* Mudric, Dusan (Dusan) > *Cc:* Tomek Mrugalski; dhcwg@ietf.org > > *Subject:* Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for > draft-fang-dhc-dhcpv4-forcerenew-extensions-02 (Ends May 8, 2016) > > > > There was a detailed presentation on this in Buenos Aires. The bottom > line is that if you have a large number of devices, the additional load of > updating the database for every forcerenew becomes substantial, and being > able to get the client to refresh its config information without updating > its lease is a substantial savings. > > > > On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Mudric, Dusan (Dusan) <dmudric@avaya.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > Can somebody please provide examples of deployment needs for DHCPv6 > RECONFIGURE message (or DHCPv4 DHCPFORCEINFORENEW), for both stateful and > stateless DHCPv6 clients? > > Regards, > Dusan Mudric. > > -----Original Message----- > From: dhcwg [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tomek Mrugalski > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 12:42 PM > To: dhcwg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for > draft-fang-dhc-dhcpv4-forcerenew-extensions-02 (Ends May 8, 2016) > > Good DHC people, > > This is just a reminder that we have adoption call in progress, but so far > the number of responses is... disappointing. This is a very short (4 pages > of technical text) I-D. Please take a quick look and state whether you're > ok with it. Or better yet, review it thoroughly and post your comments. > Your opinion and your comments are much appreciated. > > The adoption call will end early next week. > > With my co-chair hat off, I support adoption of this draft. It is short, > well motivated (good explanation what the problem is and why it needs > solving) and reasonable draft. In my opinion it simply introduces parity > between DHCPv6 and DHCPv4 (v6 has the capability to reconfigure options > only since RFC3315 was published in 2003). This mechanism has been around > for well over a decade and is operationally proven to work. > > Tomek > > On 22.04.2016 16:48, Bernie Volz (volz) wrote: > > Hi: > > > > At the IETF-95 DHC WG session, Luyuan Fang gave a presentation on > > draft-fang-dhc-dhcpv4-forcerenew-extensions-02 (Forcerenew > > Reconfiguration Extensions for DHCPv4) - see > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_proceedings_95_slides_slides-2D95-2Ddhc-2D6.pdf&d=CwIF-g&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=UT3Bk9cbLeaJxhf3iCrhIoUWB8YLZU23029sMQGQ2kY&m=9AtpUL6fIYzFJHKD_D34cbLaSr7UfQJoVnHqCCSc3iI&s=fdrSa2jxD0SbN3vaFTNMwWC_yclWLZ8spS0pKJEMjx4&e= > . > > > > There was a brief discussion about whether there was sufficient > > interest in the WG to take on this work and the conclusion was to take > > it to the list (which we would have needed to do anyway). > > > > So, we are starting an Adoption Call for this draft > > ( > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dfang-2Ddhc-2Ddhcpv4-2Dforcerenew-2Dextensions-2D02&d=CwIF-g&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=UT3Bk9cbLeaJxhf3iCrhIoUWB8YLZU23029sMQGQ2kY&m=9AtpUL6fIYzFJHKD_D34cbLaSr7UfQJoVnHqCCSc3iI&s=so5zarbh0Ii_cWj1iC6ifCVWHmBw4WeoVLdfUi7fu9E&e= > ). > > > > Please respond by May 8, 2016 whether you support having the WG take > > on this work. Please note that this means YOU need to be involved in > > resolving open issues, reading draft updates, and otherwise actively > > participating to move this work forward. > > > > The abstract from the draft is: > > > > This document extends the definition of the DHCPFORCERENEW message > > for parameter reconfiguration in DHCPv4. This extension makes the > > DHCPFORCERENEW message more suitable to reconfigure configuration > > parameters other than IP addresses, and aligns the behavior of the > > reconfiguration procedure in DHCPv4 to the corresponding behavior in > > DHCPv6. > > > > While not directly on the WG's current charter, we have confirmed with > > our AD (Suresh) that this would be acceptable work for us to adopt (no > > re-chartering will be necessary). > > > > - Tomek and Bernie > > _______________________________________________ > dhcwg mailing list > dhcwg@ietf.org > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_dhcwg&d=CwIF-g&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=UT3Bk9cbLeaJxhf3iCrhIoUWB8YLZU23029sMQGQ2kY&m=9AtpUL6fIYzFJHKD_D34cbLaSr7UfQJoVnHqCCSc3iI&s=PVv9LskHr2eCb4z-MQ6MzHHJxv7ehdNMUO9uhkCGxZk&e= > > > _______________________________________________ > dhcwg mailing list > dhcwg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_dhcwg&d=CwMFaQ&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=UT3Bk9cbLeaJxhf3iCrhIoUWB8YLZU23029sMQGQ2kY&m=IMp0tLq-MuNu9erA4e0AQLU6-UlKPST4lFi_Kde9q4E&s=ilLHNVHnEv3M03ZNFRr9_q6JrgYyuXBCxSvinBLLdQY&e=> > > >
- [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcpv4-f… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Tomek Mrugalski
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Mudric, Dusan (Dusan)
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Linhui Sun
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Lishan Li
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Luyuan Fang
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fang-dhc-dhcp… Deepak Bansal (AZURE)
- [dhcwg] Adoption call summary for draft-fang-dhc-… Tomek Mrugalski
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call summary for draft-fang-… Luyuan Fang