Re: [dhcwg] about draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6-01.txt
Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr> Thu, 22 March 2012 11:23 UTC
Return-Path: <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
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 4E4F521F865A for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 04:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.559
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FxiA+onYsJrK for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 04:23:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from givry.fdupont.fr (givry.fdupont.fr [IPv6:2001:41d0:1:6d55:211:5bff:fe98:d51e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7638021F8650 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 04:23:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from givry.fdupont.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by givry.fdupont.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q2MBNK9P072203; Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:23:20 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from dupont@givry.fdupont.fr)
Message-Id: <201203221123.q2MBNK9P072203@givry.fdupont.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
To: Peng Wu <pengwu.thu@gmail.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 22 Mar 2012 10:02:24 +0800. <CAC16W0D38-ziys4Ne=Fyw5zLSne6goedbHgoqpGgkL-5vO8voQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:23:20 +0100
Sender: Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] about draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6-01.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: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:23:24 -0000
In your previous mail you wrote: > If there do exists multiple CRAs on the same link, what about refering > to the standard procedure of multiple relay on the same link, if there > is any? => all the relays forward to all the configured servers, for responses they are sent to relays so there is no further duplication. > Yes, the second usage doesn't match. About the first usage, what about > we fake an IPv4 address and fill in the server id field? We could > extract 32 bits from the interface id in the IPv6 address, or hash the > 128 bit IPv6 address to for the 32 bits. Is it good enough for server > identification? => it is good but it breaks the second usage so it won't work... Regards Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
- [dhcwg] about draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6-01.… Francis Dupont
- Re: [dhcwg] about draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6… Peng Wu
- Re: [dhcwg] about draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6… Francis Dupont
- Re: [dhcwg] about draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6… Peng Wu
- Re: [dhcwg] about draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6… Francis Dupont