Re: [dhcwg] dhcwg Digest, DHCP Renew vs Confirm

Huan Huan <shawngespan@gmail.com> Wed, 15 February 2012 01:12 UTC

Return-Path: <shawngespan@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 7C0EA21F8673 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:12:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 mEMpEs3V+0Jb for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:12:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bk0-f44.google.com (mail-bk0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1532421F8671 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:12:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by bkuw12 with SMTP id w12so549157bku.31 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:12:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=RmINf0ntWm35IBYap8zlVPiO/GaY4fzAzKtrQeRn3M8=; b=WH7DTDipczDHeVhylV0IlVvjC3EBa9W6xj0ObaYFI7YypzxWRKti+zviFiibU4RkU7 z5EExXD9dRAzsx5LhLQEgZ5Ec/J8CTdawfMrktQo2bQbiNwGs+VGuBxI6PQIZe3coT/4 h5mbwiuzw6bBob1YY0haPMso11ejVIBRPoCZk=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.129.208 with SMTP id p16mr10697410bks.131.1329268360166; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:12:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.205.81.8 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:12:40 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:12:40 +0800
Message-ID: <CAByx+R0h5VFROEVfHG12eAN9gHefDp4P4yK_m=UNQSZ_R7YQcQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Huan Huan <shawngespan@gmail.com>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org, twinters@iol.unh.edu
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00151747ba066b3b6604b8f668ab"
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] dhcwg Digest, DHCP Renew vs Confirm
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, 15 Feb 2012 01:12:44 -0000

Hi Tim,

I think CE Router may transmit Confirm msg containing the assigned IA_NA
and Renew msg containing the assigned IA_PD separately.

BR,
Huan

2012/2/15 <dhcwg-request@ietf.org>

> If you have received this digest without all the individual message
> attachments you will need to update your digest options in your list
> subscription.  To do so, go to
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>
> Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and set "Get
> MIME or Plain Text Digests?" to MIME.  You can set this option
> globally for all the list digests you receive at this point.
>
>
>
> Send dhcwg mailing list submissions to
>        dhcwg@ietf.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        dhcwg-request@ietf.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        dhcwg-owner@ietf.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of dhcwg digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-forcerenew-nonce-04.txt
>      (internet-drafts@ietf.org)
>   2. DHCP Renew vs Confirm (Timothy Winters)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 02:40:41 -0800
> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
> Subject: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-forcerenew-nonce-04.txt
> Message-ID: <20120214104041.23040.30559.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> 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           : Forcerenew Nonce Authentication
>        Author(s)       : David Miles
>                          Wojciech Dec
>                          James Bristow
>                          Roberta Maglione
>        Filename        : draft-ietf-dhc-forcerenew-nonce-04.txt
>        Pages           : 12
>        Date            : 2012-02-14
>
>   Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) FORCERENEW allows for the
>   reconfiguration of a single host by forcing the DHCP client into a
>   Renew state on a trigger from the DHCP server.  In Forcerenew Nonce
>   Authentication the server sends a nonce to the client on the initial
>   DHCP ACK that is used for subsequent validation of a FORCERENEW
>   message.  This document updates RFC 3203.
>
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-forcerenew-nonce-04.txt
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-forcerenew-nonce-04.txt
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 08:43:50 -0500
> From: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
> To: dhcwg@ietf.org
> Subject: [dhcwg] DHCP Renew vs Confirm
> Message-ID: <C0CA95B6-1743-4D37-9BCC-D104453EBF9A@iol.unh.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hello,
>        While testing some CE Router implementations we have noticed a
> interesting behavior that is within the specifications but not clearly
> documented.  I wanted to get the working group thoughts on this.
>
>        Currently when a CE Router acting as a DHCP client, assigned both
> IA_NA and IA_PD, is unplugged from the network.  When reattached to the
> link the DHCP client transmits a DHCP Renew containing both the IA_NA and
> the IA_PD.
>
>        3315 Section 18.1.2 says that when link goes down a DHCP client
> implementation should transmit a DHCP Confirm message containing the
> assigned IA_NA.
>
>        3633 Section 12.1 doesn't allow the use of the Confirm message.  It
> states that DHCP Renew message, containing the assigned IA_PD, should be
> used when the link goes down.
>
>        According to the specifications a DHCP client should retransmit
> DHCP Confirm and DHCP Renew when link goes up.   The behavior we are seeing
> is the DHCP client transmits a DHCP renew containing both the IA_NA and
> IA_PD.
>
>        This behavior isn't causing interoperability issues as all the
> servers we have tried still respond properly to the DHCP Renew messages.
>
>        Is it ok when a DHCP client loses link for it to transmit one DHCP
> Renew message?
>
> Regards,
> Tim
> UNH-IOL
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>
>
> End of dhcwg Digest, Vol 94, Issue 13
> *************************************
>



-- 
Huan Huan