Re: [dhcwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-02 - respond by Apr 26

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 06 April 2017 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 CBD4F128990 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:15:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0pZQCii85788 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:15:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22f.google.com (mail-pg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEAA5129542 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:15:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 21so48810083pgg.1 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 16:15:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=MGZYuc6yFLb2+azgPl3lB4QRuY5gwFlni/GHk6IUaGA=; b=J7/8osM70pddbNoCZwmElxduJ4FROJNPjs5dudSdXJcFNTkdcVv+pTGgd5dWoDeRxI vA8i/ZxA2YOHtxIq6sMDFtwN64sIjFk7r5iFK3oQL+O/eaA/a+vs8q8YQYccRzBAECT1 VPC9J+FNmAsy2yoLmD9yEunmIPEnYybzzX1x3TEU6T43wF8Qw+ukJe2dQSwbmnSH56Yb OBssPul1hs/LSdYq8zCA6+76vhmhWbjHUWt+GLyhKpRThaE5qFgUiYwoHzvpK0bZZTnJ 6IlKjBtl/6UJaEYyjzOgSuRS7QCVNqIU1haJYcXtcjMRJg1hBZmGifVw+jDLLHHeHcNu 8KdA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=MGZYuc6yFLb2+azgPl3lB4QRuY5gwFlni/GHk6IUaGA=; b=uoEA+9vAIBmx4O62MeVYCEiDs/kSoIJKV9/0UAnWcDPpS+REq10nktpiMiC9ji3RTz oU85dLZ4TxKp1pqVXUKiJtUFftzm+ZNo8pkOsUmUpP6+iNjAzOyvATUAm33Pd32ArfGN xtJfvyER/JQYjX2ahTKeVWKDhWtlaBr7GHzYAiYi9Zetxg9cmzaplHx80vD+nHqKY3G4 zu8z7hEwhjhb1KaK8sG5fdpzb063E0jkIIezce4GxqF9jIDNxNFQtzlEYQmduTMW3qlo 6SPiV0ZzCsVBr3xIpavFD/ybQc04r5fLjkholWEvWq1MwQvK2exH5eyEp5dBsA4e2bPI rx5g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3hLcfIT3rnyl2HV1ArMdfZ89pZOLeIQMvwa2egImZW4N7QZ/B+unhKQoQNd6MQAA==
X-Received: by 10.84.210.44 with SMTP id z41mr7210826plh.133.1491520514559; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 16:15:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620::b60:3:f8fb:5edf:a67e:46e5? ([2620:0:b60:3:f8fb:5edf:a67e:46e5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a5sm5570486pfh.124.2017.04.06.16.15.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Apr 2017 16:15:13 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
In-Reply-To: <4cb9bdab-f3a2-a9d0-1056-302b5ecdeae7@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 16:15:13 -0700
Cc: dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6815847B-EEB6-4824-959E-F8D845A14994@fugue.com>
References: <4cb9bdab-f3a2-a9d0-1056-302b5ecdeae7@gmail.com>
To: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/R3dnn6IzzWELK3O8bZFIRTaRYG4>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-dhc-relay-port-02 - respond by Apr 26
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 23:15:18 -0000

I support advancing this work.   However, there is an issue: right now the document assumes that if the relay agent sends a message from a different source port, the DHCP server will reply to that port.   This should be stated explicitly.  Right now the document does not place requirements on DHCP servers as far as I can see, and those are needed for interoperability.