RE: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only?
"steve" <steve@relicore.com> Fri, 02 November 2001 22:05 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 RAA19944 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:05:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id RAA01988 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:05:08 -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 QAA01350; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 16:59:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA01319 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 16:59:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from c001.iad.cp.net (c001-h002.c001.iad.cp.net [209.228.6.116]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id QAA19822 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 16:59:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: (cpmta 20158 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2001 16:59:21 -0500
Received: from 4.36.57.222 (HELO STEVEPC) by smtp.relicore.com (209.228.6.116) with SMTP; 2 Nov 2001 16:59:21 -0500
X-Sent: 2 Nov 2001 21:59:21 GMT
Reply-To: steve@relicore.com
From: steve <steve@relicore.com>
To: 'Ted Lemon' <mellon@nominum.com>
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only?
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 16:57:39 -0500
Message-ID: <000301c163e9$64361400$3500000a@relicore.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
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
Yes!!! I have been advocating something similar a while back. IMHO primary / backup ownership of addresses should be distinct from lease state, and ownership transfer requests should be symmetrical. Leases should belong to either the primary or the backup, regardless of their status ( free, active, abandoned...). This would be conceptually much cleaner. Ownership transfer should be an explicit transaction. The way it is today, it is implicit, when the lease gets given out, because the lease ownership is mixed in with the life cycle states. I failed to convince the rest of the failover gang, and finally given up...perhaps you will have more luck. /sG -----Original Message----- From: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Ted Lemon Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:49 PM To: dhcwg@ietf.org Subject: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only? The failover protocol draft says that only the secondary can send a poolreq message, and indicates that the primary should attempt to reclaim backup leases from the secondary by updating from backup to free. This seems strange to me. Wouldn't it make more sense that whichever peer notices that it is short on leases would send a poolreq to the other peer, and the other would, if possible, send some leases out of its free pool? The advantage of doing it this way is that we don't have to worry about conflict resolution - the secondary knows which leases it's assigned, so it can just send what it wants to send to the primary. I guess either way works - it just seems cleaner to make poolreq/poolresp work symmetrically. _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only? Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-o… steve
- Re: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-o… Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-o… steve
- RE: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-o… Bernie Volz (EUD)
- Re: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-o… Ted Lemon
- [dhcwg] Failover: transition out of potential-con… Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-o… Kim Kinnear
- Re: [dhcwg] Failover: transition out of potential… Kim Kinnear
- Re: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-o… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] Failover: transition out of potential… Ted Lemon