RE: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-22.txt comments

"Bernie Volz (EUD)" <> Tue, 22 January 2002 01:55 UTC

Received: from ( [] (may be forged)) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29848 for <>; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:55:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id UAA06365 for; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:55:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from (localhost []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA06206; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:47:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from (odin []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id UAA06169 for <>; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:47:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29743 for <>; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:47:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g0M1lQS10773 for <>; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 19:47:26 -0600 (CST)
Received: from eamrcnt749 ( []) by (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id g0M1lPD11323 for <>; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 19:47:26 -0600 (CST)
Received: FROM BY eamrcnt749 ; Mon Jan 21 19:47:25 2002 -0600
Received: by with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <ZP0QW47J>; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 19:47:25 -0600
Message-ID: <66F66129A77AD411B76200508B65AC69B4CDDB@EAMBUNT705>
From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <>
Cc: "'Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino '" <>
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-22.txt comments
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 19:47:24 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1A2E6.BD0D7C80"
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <>

Sorry, forgot to include the main list on this issue so resending.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bernie Volz (EUD) 
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 8:46 PM
To: 'Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino'
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-22.txt comments


Is this really a major concern for you? We aren't asking that much of the client - we already ask it to retransmit messages and keep this much state, is asking it to ignore additional Reconfigure messages really that much state to keep?
It doesn't have to remember this state if it crashes or is shutdown (since it should do an Inform when it starts to make sure its current configuration is accurate).

In fact, we might want to add some text to the draft (if it isn't already there) that a client that has used Inform should re-Inform when it detects that it may have moved to a new link (ie, send an Inform when a Confirm was to have been used if the client obtained addresses).

- Bernie

-----[Modified] Original Message-----
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino []
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 3:54 AM
Subject: [dhcwg] draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-22.txt comments

(text cut)

As far as I understand the goal of Inform message is to make it possible
to make it possible to implement a stateless client which obtains various
information from DHCPv6 server (draft-droms-dnsconfig-dhcpv6-00.txt).
My question - does it make you any trouble if there's a client implementation
that does not understand Reconfigure message?  If we try to support
Reconfigure (Inform solicited by DHCP server) client implementation becomes
stateful.  Also, it would have been easier if Inform message does not mandate

dhcwg mailing list