RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter
"Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com> Mon, 14 October 2002 22:27 UTC
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA04678 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:27:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9EMTiF28687 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:29:44 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9EMTiv28684 for <dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:29:44 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA04666 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:27:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9EMRQv28574; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:27:26 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9EMQ2v28498 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:26:02 -0400
Received: from zmamail04.zma.compaq.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA04400 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:23:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tayexg12.americas.cpqcorp.net (tayexg12.americas.cpqcorp.net [16.103.130.103]) by zmamail04.zma.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7E335AF0; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:25:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tayexc13.americas.cpqcorp.net ([16.103.130.26]) by tayexg12.americas.cpqcorp.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:25:55 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:25:55 -0400
Message-ID: <9C422444DE99BC46B3AD3C6EAFC9711B02BE94F2@tayexc13.americas.cpqcorp.net>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter
Thread-Index: AcJzsQdHiKev0cazT7+e3BCiHMXZpwAH2DEQ
From: "Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com>
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>, Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2002 22:25:55.0710 (UTC) FILETIME=[A9B071E0:01C273D0]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id g9EMQ2v28499
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Thomas, And who defines who a subject matter expert is? What if we don't think they measure up technically? Do we go to Harald as IESG Chair? Your tone is belittleing to this group IMO. I don't like it sir. thanks /jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Narten [mailto:narten@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:17 PM > To: Ralph Droms > Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter > > > some comments on the charter: > > Nits: > > Would be good to have a short intro sentence at the start something > like: > > The base DHC protocol is documented in RFCs 2131 and 2132 as well as a > number of related extensions and options (e.g., RFC 3118). The working > group has the following primary objectives ... > > > * Develop a threat model and analysis of the authentication > > protection provided by RFC3118; specific issues to be addressed > > include: > > - Improved key management and scalability > > Sounds here like your already jumping ahead to the requirements for > new protocols. I.e., shouldn't this phase be focused on undertstanding > limiations of the current mechanisms? Is this just a wording issue? > > > - Security for messages passed between relay agents and servers > > - Threats of DoS attacks through FORCERENEW > > > * Develop requirements for any new protocols to address threats or > > other enhancement identified by the threat model and analysis of > > 3118 > > What's missing above is a clear statement that this WG will develop > new authentication mechanisms that address the deployability problems > with the current schemes (whether through an extension to 3118 or > something else). Or that it will address the relay-agent to DHC server > path. > > > * Complete the specification of DHCP for IPv6 (DHCPv6): > > - Gain acceptance and publication of current Internet Draft as > > Proposed Standard > > - Develop and publish specifications for options and other > > extensions to DHCPv6, including those already published as > > Internet Drafts > > General comment on options (both IPv4 and IPv6). I'd like the charter > to clearly indicate that the DHC WG will be reviewing options to make > sure they are consistent with the protocol, other option usages, etc. > > In terms of reviewing options for their semantic contents, that > will be done by subject matter experts, which may well not be in this > WG. This WG is not to take on options as WG documents until such an > outside expert has been identified and, e.g., the relevant WG has > agreed on the need for such an option. What I'd like to avoid is > having the DHC WG spend time on options for which there isn't a clear > customer. > > > - Encourage independent implementations and report on > > interoperability testing > > - Revise specification and publish for acceptance as > Draft Standard > > by 10/18/2002 > > > * Write an analysis of the DHCP specification, including RFC2131, > > RFC2132 and other RFCs defining additional options, > which identifies > > ambiguities, contradictory specifications and other obstacles to > > development of interoperable implementations. Recommend > a process > > for resolving identified problems and incorporating the > resolutions > > into the DHCP specification. > > The way its written above, sounds like one big fat hard-to-write > document. :-) Can't we do something simpler, such as just have folks > write IDs that take on specific issues and advance them as > standalone RFCs (as appropriate), incorporating them into the base > spec when the base spec is republished? I'm worried that the above > reads like a lot of work that no one will be foolish enough > to sign up for. > > > * Complete the specification and publish work in progress as > > standards: > > - Failover protocol > > - DHCP/DDNS interaction > > - SNMP MIB > > - Host name options > > - Leasequery > > - Other client and relay agent options > > Are there IDs for all of the above? If so, citing them would be good. > > Also, I don't like the "other client and relay agent options" as it is > too open ended. I think the WG needs a way of vetting potential > options before the WG takes them on officially. > > > * Review new options for DHCP, as deemed appropriate by the working > > group and/or the Internet area directors > > See above. > > Thomas > _______________________________________________ > dhcwg mailing list > dhcwg@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg > _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bernie Volz (EUD)
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bernie Volz (EUD)
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Thomas Narten
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Richard Barr Hibbs
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Richard Barr Hibbs
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ted Lemon
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bernie Volz (EUD)
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Thomas Narten
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bernie Volz (EUD)
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Thomas Narten
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bernie Volz (EUD)
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Ralph Droms
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bound, Jim
- RE: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter Bernie Volz (EUD)