IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] DHCPv6 router option

sthaug@nethelp.no Wed, 11 March 2009 17:05 UTC

Return-Path: <sthaug@nethelp.no>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 303643A694A for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MiQQGXBNNQEM for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:05:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [195.1.209.33]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F11E83A698D for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:05:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 9352 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2009 17:06:25 -0000
Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (HELO localhost) (195.1.209.33) by bizet.nethelp.no with SMTP; 11 Mar 2009 17:06:25 -0000
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:06:25 +0100
Message-Id: <20090311.180625.41631909.sthaug@nethelp.no>
To: iljitsch@muada.com
From: sthaug@nethelp.no
In-Reply-To: <6BD47EBD-E910-4C28-8921-20B9171B2710@muada.com>
References: <E206991E-081C-4EFC-81AD-7559DCBDD864@muada.com> <20090311.175355.74747534.sthaug@nethelp.no> <6BD47EBD-E910-4C28-8921-20B9171B2710@muada.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: narten@us.ibm.com, dhcwg@ietf.org, rdroms@cisco.com
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] DHCPv6 router option
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 11 Mar 2009 17:05:51 -0000

> > The Introduction in the draft captures my needs very well:
> 
> That's nice, but your needs don't give you a free pass to make my  
> network less reliable.

Clearly not - but then nobody says *you* have to use DHCP with this
option. All I am saying is that I want to use it for *my* customers.

> > The DHCP server should
> > control which default router the DHCP client should use, *not* the
> > router.
> 
> Stated like this, I can go along with that.
> 
> That's why I suggested having the DHCPv6 server tell the client WHICH  
> of the available routers to select, but if and only if that router  
> announces its presence.
> 
> This way, pointing towards a black hole and hosts losing connectivity  
> can't happen.

I am considerably more worried about a possible inconsistency between
the router and the DHCP server, than pointing the client towards a
black hole. It is not a problem for us today, and I see no reason why
it should be a bigger problem with IPv6.

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email