Re: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Thu, 28 July 2016 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.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 016A912D76A for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.987
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.987 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 VDYPUGZ-jZX4 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x234.google.com (mail-it0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234]) (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 AEAE412D7F5 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x234.google.com with SMTP id j124so83384654ith.1 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Uk0iusrOT2fvUNSHcPzFgPvLxVK2kbCsidmUQNHPsT0=; b=jB1oTFjIJ/0K0uO188rQLUDxopptSXjj/j60tcEG1DnWclQ6g/Q4R42z2DI3KYa3sh Zzrt0ZXevcUFW2NThpXXb2bH8zE03+0YPwtN9hKMEEOpKNZ36GAbTm11WOeMHyNKgSeT U1oCrohTbArXrA9uNWgPtkzESQCzOyWq35sw/6QpbXOGw2r/A/nkmuC62BCh7nUKYaeW v1thcwQhLltAavj0Rzkuqa5ILKNRFeZ3rlYaONQc1kCqNaqI1+btby1FKt00O+BYqXmR 3xTZZqeAJrkd5ZoS9mzWh9h/NgOhEthXCAg8ZZ3UQh20yLsdDnsYR6AaKjloODhy41KT d+4w==
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=Uk0iusrOT2fvUNSHcPzFgPvLxVK2kbCsidmUQNHPsT0=; b=YA3Fy8TxoqU6YNzHxug1Wy2itmjs/V5aLMLfwK37WnN9+4i3CxL1yGxOXdkk9GB0Si kcprgKfDc51Z7EIt0d0gGz8kKVku9ScrsyunSaE0QT+joIQvaFR3PH3IudcwRfMsGMZs Yp2rMwMOlDo340pTfpVxE3lQOlvm2IsDQPcCIl3thYHYgwrRRblPcSCPg2j5ge/oCW9c NntGvm5enuYqjCSyvlaJzzqxHK2mjbxaCoKvhXvbh6BI1fZR0kbYTE8y7NyDCgz9WevA ZVESS1Ps6u9D9Eeh93F2kofKBDSAy4y9kjR8rcxSXT8xqopwwneg/7fmlI4ZptlVxKbp BsIA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouuN80oqq01yQgt6okWkhhj5AMZlD9WWeI/Fpu7EMAEdxxb+K0voYvgOHJY3TKVoAO1fe9K6r2sskygKiP6v
X-Received: by 10.36.3.193 with SMTP id e184mr40787842ite.34.1469719905866; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:31:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.26.72 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:31:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1eea216f2f914eddb73eeca7903c48d2@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <8c706ad593cc403d9e738c7aafec8360@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <5671d2f3bf364bec9b70ab8cbb9cd2a9@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <9db5a86d50314519b4fcc4589717f802@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <f98d75f73d224798a406084fdb4cdedc@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <F22A046E-27FA-4EED-9699-70A6B3D49A66@gmx.com> <CAKD1Yr0nw09qss1YMi1CLqjH+iYAaVTCP4xZLsj7eNwWyLUa6w@mail.gmail.com> <1eea216f2f914eddb73eeca7903c48d2@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:31:26 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr2o0wyLT1YFx-j=FuZecqpo8BbNr6bZbOr0cF1E_d639Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1144989ae9162d0538b3d4a1
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/HQlXVA2p_d_8t4Zl0UZo_3Xrn08>
Cc: "<dhcwg@ietf.org>" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?
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: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 15:31:50 -0000

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:05 AM, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com
> wrote:

>
> If the Client sends an RS to the router, it will get back an RA the same
> as for any link. It’s just that the RA won’t be providing any configuration
> information.
>

What's wrong with adding the MTU option to that RA? That is supported by
pretty much all routers and clients today.