Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG review of draft-ietf-geopriv-lis-discovery-05

"David W. Hankins" <David_Hankins@isc.org> Thu, 29 January 2009 22:36 UTC

Return-Path: <dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dhcwg-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dhcwg-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0EB3A6814; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:36:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F03E3A69CF for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:36:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qW0xV+DH2QNH for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:36:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hankinsfamily.info (the.hankinsfamily.info [204.152.186.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60FB3A689F for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:36:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hcf.isc.org (dhcp-186.sql1.isc.org [204.152.187.186]) (authenticated bits=0) by hankinsfamily.info (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n0TMZgO6031919 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:35:44 -0800
Received: by hcf.isc.org (Postfix, from userid 10200) id F06DA57340; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:37:25 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:37:25 -0800
From: "David W. Hankins" <David_Hankins@isc.org>
To: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
Message-ID: <20090129223725.GI3153@isc.org>
References: <E51D5B15BFDEFD448F90BDD17D41CFF1055823A2@AHQEX1.andrew.com> <8E296595B6471A4689555D5D725EBB210ADE76E3@xmb-rtp-20a.amer.cisco.com> <E51D5B15BFDEFD448F90BDD17D41CFF1055823BC@AHQEX1.andrew.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <E51D5B15BFDEFD448F90BDD17D41CFF1055823BC@AHQEX1.andrew.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG review of draft-ietf-geopriv-lis-discovery-05
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0078197842=="
Sender: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:58:23PM -0600, Thomson, Martin wrote:
> Excuse me, I must been having another one of my "thick" moments.

No, DHCPv4 is just that hard.  The sensation you are perceiving is
perfectly normal, and is often accompanied by nausea and in extreme
cases vomiting.  Do not operate any heavy machinery.

I have found it helps sometimes to put it away and come back to it
after the caffeine has reached full potency.

And don't go swimming for at least an hour.

> As I understand, RFC 3396 concatenation occurs at a lower layer - a client
> that supports RFC 3396 can present arbitrarily large values to its users.
> If there is indeed no established convention for concatenation of suboptions,
> then it might be reasonable to assume concatenation.

I think older ISC DHCP software (3.0-) concatenates duplicates in sub
option spaces.  The newer software (3.1+?) that was updated for v6 and
VSIO only does the concat thing on DHCPv4 root options.  All other
'option spaces' (we call them) default to not having the flag enabled
and so do not perform concats (on the basis that the behaviour was not
described in the relevant RFC for those options).

So from my point of view, you can specify which behaviour you want in
the draft.

But I don't actually know what other software does for these spaces.

> If you assume concatenation is the method for dealing with repeated
> sub-options, then your suggestion works for me.  Without that assumption,
> I missed what you were getting at.  (For my benefit, I'm not aware of a
> use of sub-options post 3396, is there no use of concatenation with any of
> these?)

If there is, I need to be educated too!  The only space we currently
support where multiple options concatenate is the root DHCPv4 options.

All other v4 encapsulated and all v6 "spaces" are non-concat.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		     you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.		-- Jack T. Hankins
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg