Re: [dhcwg] Request for adoption of draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements

Li HUANG <bleuoisou@gmail.com> Mon, 30 September 2019 14:14 UTC

Return-Path: <bleuoisou@gmail.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 01FB1120099 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:14:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 eAMJPO0URbKH for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:14:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2e.google.com (mail-io1-xd2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A660D120058 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:14:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2e.google.com with SMTP id q10so38778295iop.2 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:14:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=khF4B7kcjzgSsYmCCTNWpygY71/otCm/kAquxSMs4T8=; b=W+8Y8SSsi/W9dTHYhpSvzuMRktnNdj9EQV7SHYGEH4Ah2cKHfTJU+hDQziKcmIANzo HYkBPzS4Kke1O3LC/OEa/N9pmqEYKxWkHSGzYjNgJfgN0jCkgIrpHR7dbtvSYobGH0Ls XxgWhUFqYZbywR/uZsCT5fJ5AxhX9qbf839U+vg3SonqmKVHk3uaSOrOifZxJ/Q483jm n6bKVVQXw+RuZ646yrunnmDy6y737Y9B0X2WqZ9lz3O+x/FSb2WT5eWdu10Tr2Kp4n7U rUw42gf/JVkcVmaxWtfY62sB92F+lfAxeeyNlVSj0kYcFL83pmJJmQ+YoXpke45PN7t7 zIgA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=khF4B7kcjzgSsYmCCTNWpygY71/otCm/kAquxSMs4T8=; b=DEw0Ns8Wf0ZyeJ7dcL8oS3JTYsH5jNEkPe5wUNZe5UtRLCK2LUD8/9S/nyCeCxxAml W1/2v864nbrcjOqazormkayVbvzYEVoHNtyVapQ3HT/YjPAhfxsGzTnjlSr/aBQvk/gW 9tRuR4jISaT2hK2RSrExwQ6z/+RO1phHiT0TM+KGcBswmSn4NuWp0NG1HNB2LYLBeXuN jQRZfdCzxq0S6DWwiuLNvrzKUGDZUFTPBKj6L1qZ/2kBJJE0oYZLJAwelBv6r46WYw6V vN2o8bkpEoGvdJmW88K9WO6FIm6G77DU+xFWuWuShCO939PUNJGsAp7IfIdliQyPYwaI f5ww==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUuIoNnVqOuG6Xq96P3rq35No1g6CYahpsV7ac0AxI070tLtUVZ HIj0VYkZQBM8gnb5EKHaVNI2hgnunGc89CGVS0I=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz5eayoZfHRL+RnIpxmIY72WtKO9Pwz5VlHJrXU7mAvPgMZ+cs23/Y2XLP3+xqvwYJ4q5v3fVN/f002H9YbUO0=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:6c1:: with SMTP id p1mr18150353ils.99.1569852871809; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 07:14:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANFmOt=R1yAGLsM-TZKLPfujfmzLyMHRK_8895g17QvdpQ5n1A@mail.gmail.com> <b0d04f8f-da76-7181-6b4c-26da532c477d@gmail.com> <c5ec1a09-dbe6-fc32-d9da-d2f8abc1957d@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c5ec1a09-dbe6-fc32-d9da-d2f8abc1957d@gmail.com>
From: Li HUANG <bleuoisou@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 22:14:19 +0800
Message-ID: <CAGGiuEbJJsp+Lh=sBYXGzYJP-siJwFBh0Y6zQbRw3pM2Wj4b9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c620760593c5da95"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/O-7C7FZnBKm7gF6I7EXd8k83cAo>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Request for adoption of draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 14:14:35 -0000

22:10.hk S8 m800


Good Day,


Looking for some who would and be able to get the solution.  Since OS
publisher would not support for user without company contract at commercial
group.


This is a pay way inquiry to some who can make this deal off recommandated
by IETF hopefully.


Sincerely yours
Li HUANG

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 20:55 Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Is this a requirements draft, a problem statement draft or a solution
> draft?
>
> The filename has 'requirements' in it, but there are two sections:
> 'Problems Observed' and 'Requirements'.  The former makes for a Problem
> Statement draft.
>
> Its Intended Status is 'Standards Track'.  But typical Requirement and
> Problem Statement drafts are intended as INFORMATIONAL.
>
> Alex
>
> Le 26/09/2019 à 09:42, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > If the question on whether or not adoption is supported, then my answer
> > is yes, I support adoption.
> >
> > If the question is to receive feedback of the draft, then my answer is
> > this: I support requirement R-1 'relay MUST maintain a local routing
> > table dynamically updated with prefixes and next hops as they [the
> > prefixes] are delegated to clients'.
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > Le 26/09/2019 à 08:58, Naveen Kottapalli a écrit :
> >> Hello DHC WG,
> >>
> >> We would like to request for the adoption of our draft
> >> draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements
> >> <
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements> that
>
> >> was submitted in June-2019.  As a background, please find the details
> >> of draft below.
> >>
> >> The draft addresses the below problems by defining the requirements of
> >> a DHCPv6 Relay agent when relaying the delegated prefixes.
> >>
> >> 1.  Client / Relay / Server goes out of sync resulting in route
> >> mismanagement which in turn results in traffic issues.
> >> 2.  Relay rejects client messages due to unknown or stale prefix.
> >> 3.  Relay generates messages ‘on behalf’ of the server
> >> 4.  Issues observed when more than 1 prefix is delegated to clients
> >>
> >> We would like to hear feedback from the forum on the draft and will be
> >> happy to address the issues in draft (if any).
> >>
> >> Yours,
> >> Naveen.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> dhcwg mailing list
> >> dhcwg@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dhcwg mailing list
> > dhcwg@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>