Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 24 May 2012 19:29 UTC
Return-Path: <volz@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 9ACCC21F84CD for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2012 12:29:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K5n0dJiSDTis for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2012 12:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D12121F848E for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 12:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=16298; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1337887794; x=1339097394; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:from:to; bh=ZV8rUYwefiKMKtpkJ8Ka24zRsGHSMlXSKJW3iTJIbEY=; b=DMl6UGjatCwucTja2g5eiMGJdYVKv+yZj+xg4MMdxP7jIjiVps1E3cyG LveM9gGgX6IGSnBYXzPMEe4KFygckIVNUmzT6AdsPvZDe9dhTfawwlf/w 9JWEEJ05N8j1oYDskZ5IT+V6ORTrNknqYJod5EOsfJ6m/ASycgHUQEsIO Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFAPWKvk+tJXG9/2dsb2JhbABDgkWoUwGJTIEHghUBAQEEEgEJEQNbAQgRBAEBCwYXAQdFCQkBBAESCBMHh2sLm0+gBYp/hEBgA4g/jWiMfYFkgwg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.75,652,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="83435047"
Received: from rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com ([173.37.113.189]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 May 2012 19:29:53 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com [72.163.62.139]) by rcdn-core2-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q4OJTr7U021672 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 May 2012 19:29:53 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-101.cisco.com ([72.163.62.143]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 24 May 2012 14:29:53 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD39E3.980CF93D"
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 14:29:52 -0500
Message-ID: <D9B5773329187548A0189ED6503667890C7B57AC@XMB-RCD-101.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
thread-index: Ac05uKdEL2fp8FLMS7ymS5aexC6oDgAKig9Q
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: "Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)" <ghalwasi@cisco.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 May 2012 19:29:53.0258 (UTC) FILETIME=[97E8ACA0:01CD39E3]
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
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: Thu, 24 May 2012 19:29:56 -0000
Hi and thanks for reading and commenting! Comments below (BV>). - Bernie From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi) Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 11:03 AM To: dhcwg@ietf.org Subject: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00 I have read this informational draft and I have couple of comments so far. 1.)Section 3.1 Replace Section 17.1.3 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00#se ction-17.1.3> : (existing errata) The client MUST ignore any Advertise message that includes a Status Code option containing the value NoAddrsAvail, with the exception that the client MAY display the associated status message to the user. With: The client MUST ignore any IAs in an Advertise message that includes a Status Code option containing the value NoAddrsAvail, with the exception that the client MAY display the associated status message to the user. An Advertise message without any IA options MUST be ignored. Is this only applicable to IA_NA.? I guess in case client sends SOLICIT with both IA_NA and IA_PD. Then in that case I guess we should mention "NoPrefixAvail" as well. BV> It is applicable to IA_NA and IA_TA as those are the cases that end up with the Status Code option of NoAddsAvailable in the "main" part of the message - not in each IA_NA/IA_TA. (IA_PD puts the NoPrefixAvail Status Code option in the IA_PD itself. This is what we wish had been specified for IA_NA/IA_TA but was not.) 2.) Section 3.6 Proposed solution: the client should keep a single session with the server. The client should continue with the IA_ options received, while continuing to request the other IA options in subsequent messages to the server. That means continue to include the empty unanswered IAs in subsequent Renew and Rebind messages. I believe, it is possible that a particular server is willing to offer only a subset of IA_'s which has been requested. In that case, what's the use of including the other IA_ in the subsequent renew/rebind. As in this case server will anyway only renew only one IA_. ? Are we suggesting that a client at any given point of time should only be talking to one server after the advertise is accepted. BV> What harm is there in continuing to include this in the subsequent operations? If the server's policy prohibits returning addresses or delegated prefixes for these other IA types, there is no harm. The main assumption is that clients are in a single administrative domain and thus talking to another server will be unlikely to help (except of course in the case of misconfiguration, but better that the issue is detected early and dealt with). - Bernie
- [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-statef… Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)
- Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-st… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-st… Stephen Jacob
- Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-st… Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)
- Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-st… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-st… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-st… Bernie Volz (volz)