Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6
Vijay Bhaskar A K <vijayak@india.hp.com> Wed, 23 January 2002 18:13 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA19029 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:13:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id NAA09369 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:13:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA08025; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:56:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA07996 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:56:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from atlrel6.hp.com (atlrel6.hp.com [156.153.255.205]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA18405 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:56:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from dce.india.hp.com (dce.india.hp.com [15.10.45.122]) by atlrel6.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19E016000CC; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 12:55:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from vijayak@localhost) by dce.india.hp.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.8.6 SMKit7.02) id XAA03676; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:29:52 +0530 (IST)
From: Vijay Bhaskar A K <vijayak@india.hp.com>
Message-Id: <200201231759.XAA03676@dce.india.hp.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6
To: rdroms@cisco.com
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 23:29:51 +0530
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020122144616.036c6a28@funnel.cisco.com> from Ralph Droms at Jan "22, " 2002 "02:55:41" pm
X-Mailer: ELM [$Revision: 1.17.214.2 $]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> We've recently experienced a proliferation of proposed and defined options > for DHCPv6. Initially, the WG agreed to publish all options that were > defined at the time the base spec was completed in the same doc. I'm > having second thoughts about that decision. Here's what I'm thinking: > > * The new options are adding more weight to > an already hefty document > * Keeping all the options in one doc make > updating any one option more complicated > * Reviewing all of these options will slow > down the acceptance process The basic use of DHCPv6 is not only allocating IP addresses but also for giving other configuration parameters also. Most of the OS are IPv6fied and almost all the applications are IPv6 enabled. The hosts need DHCPv6 to provide options for getting the info about the servers providing various services available to them. This will make the host work as fullfledged IPv6fied node. If your concern is about delay in getting the PS, i worry that, it will take another year to get all those options in the options draft and making it PS. I feel that we can add the options in the base spec which are already requested to be added, because we really need them. I dont agree that review of the options will take much time, since including the options doesn't involve major design change and most of the options are already known in DHCPv4 and most of the options follow the similar pattern. > > I propose that we put a moratorium on adding any new options to > draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-22.txt, and move any non-essential options out of > draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-22.txt into individual drafts. The definition of > "essential" is open to discussion; here's a first pass at a list of the > options to retain in draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-22.txt: > > * DHCP unique identifier option > * Identity association option > * IA Address option > * Requested Temporary Addresses (RTA) Option > * Option request option > * Preference option > * Elapsed Time > * Client message option > * Server message option > * Authentication option > * Server unicast option > * Domain Search Option > * Domain Name Server Option > * Status Code Option > > - Ralph > > > _______________________________________________ > dhcwg mailing list > dhcwg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg > -- ____Vijay_Bhaskar_A_K____ ______Inet_Services______ ________HP_ISO___________ ______Ph:_2051424________ ____Telnet:_847_1424_____ ___Pager:_9624_371137____ _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Mark Stapp
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Bernie Volz (EUD)
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jitesh N Verma
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Bernie Volz (EUD)
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Martin Stiemerling
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Vijay Bhaskar A K
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Vijay Bhaskar A K
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 John Schnizlein
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Richard Barr Hibbs
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jitesh N Verma
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Martin Stiemerling
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Jim Bound
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Bernie Volz (EUD)
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6 Ralph Droms