Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-06 changes

Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Mon, 02 November 2015 07:06 UTC

Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 322671B31B2 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 23:06:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 MavnB4RgnnEu for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 23:06:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-x231.google.com (mail-pa0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::231]) (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 6CDE01B3338 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 23:06:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pacfv9 with SMTP id fv9so145708188pac.3 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 23:06:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kQz1hbM5cZwUdPp1jqZsUr51B5VL0Yo+C4SkAJOX17c=; b=oOYKo9rN0uzTbS9JcduxXZv9kLgXNwdBKURsWEmai9CTm0ZeB2oXNd0BqFM/kiv2t7 Q1IbTcF/M1ujKazCMLhD90PN9QcZ1wJAMXnigiMwEAHcFYganKQCsIGmTxTA1bQxHE0B u+yOcEz7PYrgol0hJmAdSiLgoAsKd5vAMgbYHTbgEXUOT5Bi9UvUVdJEFqLQPA/qith4 yf136ixh5fdgoPgA6ltzpdlkkSBw/nf/vnLa67YHlNBICSZIjRGqA0wFt3vDRxpdUawX q6xTQm2wIo0ZanLRU4bLamFuHZgImF22wORacamGf7MAhCb2i181NnTro/1AUir+2a+1 Ja6A==
X-Received: by 10.66.122.33 with SMTP id lp1mr25216385pab.12.1446448014080; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 23:06:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-24-58.meeting.ietf94.jp ([133.93.24.58]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id ir4sm21895088pbb.93.2015.11.01.23.06.52 for <dhcwg@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 01 Nov 2015 23:06:53 -0800 (PST)
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
References: <20151019205337.12663.1935.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
Message-ID: <56370B8B.8090207@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 16:06:51 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20151019205337.12663.1935.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/OEvMVqSQyWjIo2uPRDxnxBzfsh8>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-06 changes
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 02 Nov 2015 07:06:57 -0000

Hi,
The updated topo-conf draft has been published two weeks ago, but it
seems that authors never described the changes, so there they are:
- updated terminology section
- updated DHCPv6 to DHCP where the text applies to both v4 and v6
- fixed several typos
- clarified the relation between subnet selection based on addresses vs.
  selecting the subnet based on interface-id
- updated example in the DHCPv6 section to use IPv6 addresses
- Removed section 8 about dynamic lookup (added reference to
  appropriate section in RFC7227 that discusses the issue)
- added examples that explain why shared subnets may be warranted

Authors believe that those changes addresses previous comments made by
Jinmei, Marcin and Bernie. I would appreciate if you could confirm that
this is really the case (or point out what I have missed).

Thanks,
Tomek

On 20/10/15 05:53, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>  This draft is a work item of the Dynamic Host Configuration Working Group of the IETF.
> 
>         Title           : Customizing DHCP Configuration on the Basis of Network Topology
>         Authors         : Ted Lemon
>                           Tomek Mrugalski
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-06.txt
> 	Pages           : 17
> 	Date            : 2015-10-19
> 
> Abstract:
>    DHCP servers have evolved over the years to provide significant
>    functionality beyond that which is described in the DHCP base
>    specifications.  One aspect of this functionality is support for
>    context-specific configuration information.  This memo describes some
>    such features and makes recommendations as to how they can be used.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf/
> 
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-06
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-06
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>