IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Mon, 20 August 2012 12:39 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.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 ED0B321F8618 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.411
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.411 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zLWgOtETkX6l for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og122.obsmtp.com (exprod7og122.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4540321F8634 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:39:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob122.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUDIv9aFmeK3Yw6YAaJSGYZ/iTatFRxds@postini.com; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:39:18 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 592EA1B82CD for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BEAE190043; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:39:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 05:39:11 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
Thread-Index: AQHNdqZP3dOUnDeDJkKs3MsN2OTAhpddHmiAgAXOj4CAADyqAA==
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:39:10 +0000
Message-ID: <01634C66-161A-4C56-BD24-2F2180581D98@nominum.com>
References: <0AE8374B-0E04-48FF-B71D-2EE8FAAC9ED1@nominum.com> <93E6DE37-FD02-42BC-B4E9-DF0BBCD06C02@nominum.com> <74DBBDC4-9827-4141-AB37-AE9256ACFF15@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <74DBBDC4-9827-4141-AB37-AE9256ACFF15@employees.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_01634C66161A4C56BD242F2180581D98nominumcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00
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: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:39:19 -0000

On Aug 20, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org<mailto:otroan@employees.org>> wrote:
could we go forward with this draft that clarifies how multiple stateful options work in a single session, and with the general assumption that a client will choose one DHCP server and that server is authoritative?

My concern is that if you do so, it will essentially result in clients standardizing on whatever behavior you specify, and so whether we write another standard or not, it will not be available in practice.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email