[dhcwg] Conflict review result of draft-gont-dhcpv6-stable-privacy-addresses-01
Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Wed, 18 May 2016 04:51 UTC
Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.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 370DC12B027 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 21:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 7e9ypjEE4nwA for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 May 2016 21:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usplmg20.ericsson.net (usplmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB64712B00F for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 May 2016 21:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c618062d-f79886d000002334-b6-573bec85df98
Received: from EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.81]) by usplmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 38.00.09012.58CEB375; Wed, 18 May 2016 06:16:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB107.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.124]) by EUSAAHC003.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.81]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 18 May 2016 00:51:10 -0400
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
To: 'DHC WG' <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Conflict review result of draft-gont-dhcpv6-stable-privacy-addresses-01
Thread-Index: AdGwwOUnZfpadBTaSmOoY3nEE+3a4g==
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 04:51:09 +0000
Message-ID: <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF63AD33829@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.12]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrHLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPoG7bG+twg+O3uSzudrQwOjB6LFny kymAMYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEr487C3WwFDZwVv3s2MjcwLmPvYuTkkBAwkWht+8kMYYtJXLi3 nq2LkYtDSOAoo8S0P5NZIJzljBKbtm9gBaliA+rYsPMzE4gtIiArcfvYLrBJwgJBEicmr2CH iIdL/Du4CapGT+JvRzPYBhYBVYkfMw+ygdi8Ar4Ss460g9mMQJu/n1oDVs8sIC5x68l8JoiL BCSW7DkPdZ2oxMvH/1ghbCWJOa+vMUPU60gs2P2JDcLWlli28DUzxHxBiZMzn7BMYBSehWTs LCQts5C0zELSsoCRZRUjR2lxQU5uupHBJkZgKB+TYNPdwXh/uuchRgEORiUe3oQp1uFCrIll xZW5hxglOJiVRHgzPwOFeFMSK6tSi/Lji0pzUosPMUpzsCiJ84o9UgwXEkhPLEnNTk0tSC2C yTJxcEo1MLLXSu5aHczw912NQmAwv66sE4Pv++AJ66Sqlz+TXv1EUGj7x08rYnuOe1385rGv o2q74s1jgns2z1Dud8i/fcLy+tlPnms/iKQ5u1hfm76F+zhz5Qwe4dcT/2T16HTOMHE3Xm97 PFzTyNnCn8fCQbLJb/W0z4a8rycff/R28qUHJZk1trOO/FZiKc5INNRiLipOBABVwxXAYQIA AA==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/IKMX-XZRVHSFFuhN2f50ggJ2Wqo>
Subject: [dhcwg] Conflict review result of draft-gont-dhcpv6-stable-privacy-addresses-01
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, 18 May 2016 04:51:13 -0000
Hi all, Thanks to all who provided comments on this draft. After going through your comments and reviewing extensive working group discussions I have entered the following conflict review text === Conflict review text === The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in the dhc WG, but this relationship does not prevent publishing. Additionally, the IESG requests the following note be added to the document if it is published: The proposal described in this document has an unaddressed failure case that makes it unsuitable for use as the mechanism to provide the claimed failover features for DHCPv6 servers. Specifically, when a DHCPv6 client DECLINEs a provided address there is no recovery mechanism described that will result in the DHCPv6 client obtaining a working IPv6 address. === End of conflict review text === Let me know if you have any concerns. This document will be on the May 19th IESG telechat. Thanks Suresh
- [dhcwg] Conflict review result of draft-gont-dhcp… Suresh Krishnan