IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-xia-dhc-host-gen-id-04

Jiangsheng <jiangsheng@huawei.com> Mon, 09 May 2011 03:05 UTC

Return-Path: <jiangsheng@huawei.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 90E35E0701 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 May 2011 20:05:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 pFHVZWAMzTR7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 May 2011 20:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82DA9E06A3 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 May 2011 20:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LKW006V8R8K34@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:05:09 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxeml208-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LKW00BH0R8KKX@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:05:08 +0800 (CST)
Received: from SZXEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.31) by szxeml208-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.60) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:05:08 +0800
Received: from SZXEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.122]) by SZXEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.31]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Mon, 09 May 2011 11:05:08 +0800
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 03:05:07 +0000
From: Jiangsheng <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <4DC4786E.9070607@ericsson.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.110.98.37]
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Message-id: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B92835398@SZXEML504-MBS.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-language: zh-CN
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US
Thread-topic: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-xia-dhc-host-gen-id-04
Thread-index: AQHMDD7O0UdRW5N5Wk6UhUPUFsZfC5SDv4iw
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
References: <4A352640-DF7D-47F9-9D66-5AA41ACECBF6@nominum.com> <4DC4786E.9070607@ericsson.com>
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org WG" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-xia-dhc-host-gen-id-04
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: Mon, 09 May 2011 03:05:19 -0000

Hi, Suresh,

Thanks for your read and support.

In principle, the format of IA_PA is the same with IA_PD except for Option code. The different is on the semantics and usage model. The IA_PD option is to delegate prefix to a routable device for itself use only. The IA_PA option is to assign/notify a prefix to a host device. The prefix inside an IA_PA is shared across many clients. We will make this clear in next version. Thanks for pointing this out.

Best regards,

Sheng

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Suresh Krishnan
> Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2011 6:39 AM
> To: Ted Lemon
> Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org WG
> Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-xia-dhc-host-gen-id-04
> 
> Hi Ted,
>    I have read the draft and I am supportive of the problem this draft
> is trying to solve (i.e. allow host generated IIDs). But, the mechanism
> proposed in the draft is a bit unclear for me to say whether this is
> the
> best way to solve the solution or not. In particular, the semantics of
> the IA_PA are not detailed very well. e.g. How exactly is this
> different
> from an IA_PD with a 64 bit prefix? Can a prefix inside a IA_PA be
> shared across multiple clients etc.
> 
> Thanks
> Suresh
> 
> 2011/4/25, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>:
> > The working group discussed this draft in Prague and there was
> interest in
> > taking on the work.   The draft is an attempt to solve the problem of
> how to
> > use CGAs and other host-generated addresses with DHCP.   If you are
> in favor
> > of taking on this work, please let us know.   If you think this is
> work the
> > working group should not do, please let us know.   If you think the
> draft
> > doesn't adequately address the problem at present, please get
> involved.
> >
> > I will evaluate the working group consensus on adopting this work on
> Friday,
> > May 6.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dhcwg mailing list
> > dhcwg@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> >
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email