Re: [dhcwg] Anyone interested in continuing draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt?

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Wed, 21 August 2013 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@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 E761D11E8216 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 06:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.424
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.424 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.175, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, 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 4sE2Fx4OyLHN for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 06:24:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9156511E83A6 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 06:24:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id r7LDOPtB015622 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:24:25 +0200
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r7LDOPnl024519 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:24:25 +0200 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id r7LDOKVZ007356 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:24:25 +0200
Message-ID: <5214BF85.8020509@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 15:24:21 +0200
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
References: <52123110.10205@gmail.com> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36EEDD8B410@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
In-Reply-To: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36EEDD8B410@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Anyone interested in continuing draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt?
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: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 13:24:34 -0000

Hi,

One point I think is essential is the installment of routes in the DHCP
Relay upon Prefix Assignment.

The base DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation RFC does not stipulate that DHCP must
install a route in the DHCP Relay upon delegation.

This draft seems to at least assume it, and to describe much more about
it: how various parts of assigned prefixes are aggregated and communicated.

I support it.

Alex

Le 21/08/2013 14:41, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com a écrit :
> Hi Tomek,
>
> I do still think draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt documents a
> useful feature in order to have more automation and also control
> routes aggregation instead of relying on proprietary behaviors of
> each implementation. Of course, part of these objectives can be
> achieved if routes are installed manually or use an out of band
> mechanism to enforce routing aggregation policies. Still, the
> proposal in draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt is superior
> because the DHCP server has the knowledge of the prefix assignments;
> and therefore routes can be triggered with dhcpv6 .
>
> A way to progress with this document is to target the Experimental
> track. Based on the experience that will be gained in real
> deployments, the status can be revisited if required.
>
> Cheers, Med
>
>> -----Message d'origine----- De : dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
>> [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Tomek Mrugalski
>> Envoyé : lundi 19 août 2013 16:52 À : dhcwg Objet : [dhcwg] Anyone
>> interested in continuing draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6- prefix-pool-opt?
>>
>> During Berlin meeting chairs asked if there is still interest in
>> the prefix-pool-option. There was nobody interested in the work in
>> the room. The unanimous consensus in the room was to drop it. I
>> just wanted to confirm that on the list.
>>
>> If you are interested in this work, want to support it and
>> participate in it, please let us know by replying to the mailing
>> list. Otherwise we'll drop this work and mark that draft as a dead
>> WG document.
>>
>> Please respond within 2 weeks (until Sep. 2nd).
>>
>> Bernie & Tomek _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>