[dhcwg] Rechartering DHC
"Bernie Volz (volz)" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Tue, 08 July 2014 17:44 UTC
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F4931A0368 for <email@example.com>; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 10:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.151 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([184.108.40.206]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id USgjdTyEU-9i for <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 10:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [220.127.116.11]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF0B61A0370 for <email@example.com>; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 10:44:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; l=16146; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1404841464; x=1406051064; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=M4clYZeuKsPErN1jHPdgsP+YptuodkFD4g0oALMrWjw=; b=l2/9Of97AFoUZPKnZ7adQzARhLBI3B9SDlzoZ6n7NW5ATH24gUEhqe1+ 5jWJmqNMyFjYLV3cYFkoY+DDcIRDtHaTyIQR/Oi00wNL+Xeu/rKRnyoBJ 15FTZx5ZZGlgKnDjUSItpfsZx78TR2EalFnIunXOkpbGxeo3q0+yk4ur5 0=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,626,1400025600"; d="scan'208,217";a="338567292"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([18.104.22.168]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jul 2014 17:44:23 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com [22.214.171.124]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s68HiMgK004963 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 8 Jul 2014 17:44:22 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.176]) by xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com ([126.96.36.199]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 8 Jul 2014 12:44:22 -0500
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <email@example.com>
To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
Thread-Topic: Rechartering DHC
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 17:44:21 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B5EB66Axmbrcdx04ciscoc_"
Cc: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
Subject: [dhcwg] Rechartering DHC
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 17:44:27 -0000
Hello: We are proposing to update the DHC WG charter. This update is fairly minor in that the current charter (07) is revised as follows: 1. Updates the list of items being worked on (in bullet 1) - removing those items that we have completed and adding those items adopted by the WG. 2. Removing #2 (NTP option update). 3. Removing #3 (option guidelines). 4. Fixing a typo in old #8 (problems replaced with specifications) - this is now #6. The updated proposed charter text is below. Please comment to the WG and ADs. We will quickly cover this charter update at the Toronto IETF. - Bernie and Tomek Charter for Working Group The Dynamic Host Configuration working group (DHC WG) has developed DHCP for automated allocation, configuration and management of IP addresses and TCP/IP protocol stack parameters. DHCPv4 is currently a Draft Standard and is documented in RFC 2131 and RFC 2132. DHCPv6 is currently a Proposed Standard and is documented in RFC 3315. Subsequent RFCs document additional options and other enhancements to the specifications. The DHC WG is responsible for defining DHCP protocol extensions. Definitions of new DHCP options that are delivered using standard mechanisms with documented semantics are not considered a protocol extension and thus are outside of scope for the DHC WG. Such options should be defined within their respective WGs and reviewed by the DHCP Directorate. However, if such options require protocol extensions or new semantics, the protocol extension work must be done in the DHC WG. The DHC WG has the following main objectives: 1. Develop extensions to the DHCPv6 infrastructure as required to meet new applications and deployments of DHCP. The topics currently in development are: - DHCPv6 Stateful issues - DHCPv6 Failover - DHCPv6 Load Balancing - Extending DHCPv6 to work with multiple provisioning domains - DHCP provisioning of IPv4 clients over IPv6 networks - Access Network Identifier options - DNS registration for SLAAC - Active leasequery - Secure DHCPv6 with Public Key - Dynamic Allocation of Shared IPv4 Addresses Additional topics may only be added with approval from the responsible Area Director or by re-chartering. 2. Develop documents that help explain operational considerations for the wider community. 3. Issue updated versions of the DHCP base specifications-- RFC 3315 (DHCPv6), RFC 3633 (DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation) and RFC 3736 (Stateless DHCPv6) so as to fix errata and bring the documents to the point where they can advance along the IETF Standards Track. 4. In the process of updating the DHCP base specifications, in cases where time is of the essence, issue corrections and clarifications of the specifications in order to quickly address interoperability problems. 5. Write analyses and interoperability reports on existing DHC documents, including base specs. 6. When serious interoperability problems are found in other DHCP specifications, issue updated versions of those specifications to address the interoperability problems.
- [dhcwg] Rechartering DHC Bernie Volz (volz)