Re: [dhcwg] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-05

"Naiming Shen (naiming)" <naiming@cisco.com> Sat, 22 July 2017 17:24 UTC

Return-Path: <naiming@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 E661B1319B4; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 10:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.012
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.012 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HTML_ATTACH=0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 hRpxvVl1i5eE; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 10:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 412E112EBF9; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 10:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=33760; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1500744294; x=1501953894; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=Nf7M0PF1SqWzuA9+wfp+PuAC3UgHKnI2R2WWA0r6Bq0=; b=fOyH9AXaUTZrD9UNlnjg3flqmU8252rtlnd0SWQr08DgGdjNLDQdo9qy fKSY2tHjHQIobTTpgWRKXBzIx/sP7Q4ncN5zPNEk02dT5/N2BoGcZewCu ZnTdVHmjtr7zT6bgcGbW0DjaaG/T4rfftwnva+bCqiX4c+kQQglfG2rEm Y=;
X-Files: draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-06-from-5.diff.html, ATT00001.htm : 19135, 2115
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BlAQD5iHNZ/5RdJa1cGgEBAQECAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QgBAQEBgm8+LWSBFAeOBZFDkHuFLIISLIM8gV8Cg34/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRk?= =?us-ascii?q?GeRACAQYCBEICMCUCBA4FDoohEJAYoAqLLQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q4PgyiFWQuCboRVg1mCMQEEl02CNyyFHgKELoIdgQGHFYU7ggwZPoR5iRaBRZV?= =?us-ascii?q?jAR84gQp1FUkSAYRHgjx2iFKBDgEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,397,1496102400"; d="htm'217?html'217,217?scan'217,217,208,217";a="55297898"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jul 2017 17:24:52 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (xch-rcd-005.cisco.com [173.37.102.15]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6MHOp5U005205 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:24:52 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-004.cisco.com (173.37.102.14) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 12:24:51 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-004.cisco.com ([173.37.102.14]) by XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com ([173.37.102.14]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Sat, 22 Jul 2017 12:24:50 -0500
From: "Naiming Shen (naiming)" <naiming@cisco.com>
To: Ralf Weber <ralf.weber@nominum.com>
CC: "int-dir@ietf.org" <int-dir@ietf.org>, dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port.all@ietf.org>, "Enke Chen (enkechen)" <enkechen@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: Intdir early review of draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-05
Thread-Index: AQHTAVDdC/pmVM+g8UmmGrJI4+prW6JeA2gAgAJsn4A=
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:24:50 +0000
Message-ID: <A5E26208-902E-4101-9542-B5896342396E@cisco.com>
References: <150055249283.9589.17482424577250077220@ietfa.amsl.com> <B560FD8D-FFF1-4D2E-947B-A1F1BD3AA6DA@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B560FD8D-FFF1-4D2E-947B-A1F1BD3AA6DA@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.58.222]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_005_A5E26208902E41019542B5896342396Eciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/HRvMc8G74gVAbjxjCiuDm2gtMBk>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-05
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 17:24:57 -0000

Changed again of the paragraph in section 4 to below, thanks
to Ted who offerred the text:

   Relay agents do not maintain state.  To return a message to its
   source, the relay agent must include all the required information in
   the Relay-Forward message.  When a relay in a sequence of cascaded
   relays does not use the standard source port, that source port must
   be included along with the source address.  This option allows the
   relay agent to do so.

rfcdiff attached.

Cheers,
- Naiming