Re: [dhcwg] DHCPv6 Reply Message

Timothy Winters <tim@qacafe.com> Fri, 02 October 2020 18:50 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@qacafe.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 2C91F3A169A for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 11:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=qacafe.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 Q0dWbJtaZVJa for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 11:50:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) (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 E74DA3A1698 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 11:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id m5so3084316lfp.7 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 11:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qacafe.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/rpmAVJRQHfNBompt5pnsK2032xGHZei+hrIEYg26/I=; b=X7VYHoQqsk4D/7/yXY1dfSsHC4vhJ6Zse0nZwxxb/UAL2PvCmxMXIkQZwcWACnheuI X8+msL6twfklnxZaLq88DPbS00EoO5wL007Ie7uNkXWUNUQ1ldpjb8ac5cW39s6pMTen IkevvVv/BpLJL2zphKsUpNUrNAYtlAy0BJ4PU=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/rpmAVJRQHfNBompt5pnsK2032xGHZei+hrIEYg26/I=; b=c6PY2QR5oOmbW/DTclZ68Q2LKfDeHzHG2JqhLyxdlD422vPsVP3L0U2SKV115Pa+Lw ksLctSwMt6/57bJwly6ynWEDTseBgQhMrsc9/qQZKh98FIoFa8lv+aTGmRwN6qvwcxK5 pL5CJIWD9MH7ezhtaqeU3bihNCa8FdnYq9nPReBgIbf/B4gQV6dMKsDDopD9r8Ixhyll UzhtjmNdAT44R5K/a35VaAWtWNSfeaiK/JYBxBqGRRXqDR2/QuMEtSak0BCPM0zlxgau vyN2I+nSbot9vNbZbxmCAgD+VxzD7sbJgGqguzDCR2Fg0HJ5EPz6Rp0dhQndbz6ZDxk/ eISQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531EAmyVik3kW7J5gF0UFGJI2NS4U3cQ+XO7eqhM5kMwYcX9J43m DSs5hLW+qonQpLSdWFVLryZxyGYZrNCmelabxfDXTQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx0m5pOhmvT0dNVYH2W9KkjNqmookHvwJaTj1ihzQIgBKrB1RYoROw3phWjzD6hG/3KPAYp2LMzt40E3vgJWWU=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:c304:: with SMTP id t4mr1239506lff.199.1601664628017; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 11:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAB-aFv_iTjxz9t6ycYeS4r8Mq1ZxpvS2ZrAkK4HujnHW9p=__g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB-aFv_iTjxz9t6ycYeS4r8Mq1ZxpvS2ZrAkK4HujnHW9p=__g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Timothy Winters <tim@qacafe.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:50:17 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJgLMKs8WuQoZXeAWJHD0d35BMYB-PU-XfO5_Yi1kMoGuOPt_A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Timothy Carlin <tjcarlin@iol.unh.edu>
Cc: dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000033e33705b0b49b1c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/TJXlJ7VTraxEtM4t4kueanJ65KQ>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] DHCPv6 Reply Message
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 18:50:32 -0000

Hi Tim,

My reading is the DHCPv6 client must continue to transmit Renew messages
until receiving an Reply message containing the IA_Addr option that needs
to be renewed as it's not supposed to be updated on the client.

Retransmitting with the same transaction id seems to be correct behavior.

~Tim

On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 2:00 PM Timothy Carlin <tjcarlin@iol.unh.edu> wrote:

> Hi dhcwg,
>
> A question has come up regarding how to handle the situation where a
> DHCPv6 Client receives a Reply to a Renew Message.
>
> For a Renew transaction, how should a client process a Reply message that
> contains a valid IA_NA, but does not contain any IA Address option?  The
> Reply message is otherwise valid and complete.
>
> RFC 3315 says this:
>
>    If the Reply was received in response to a Solicit (with a Rapid
>>    Commit option), Request, Renew or Rebind message, the client updates
>>    the information it has recorded about IAs from the IA options
>>    contained in the Reply message:
>> ...
>>    -  Leave unchanged any information about addresses the client has
>>       recorded in the IA but that were not included in the IA from the
>>       server.
>
>
> RFC 8415 updated the word addresses, and instead uses "leases":
>
>    -  Leave unchanged any information about leases the client has
>>       recorded in the IA but that were not included in the IA from the
>>       server.
>
>
> Should the client continue the same Renew transaction (same transaction
> id) and retransmit as the IA Address Option was not included, or process
> the Reply, update T1/T2 and start a new Renew transaction (new transaction
> id) at T1?
>
> Thanks,
> Tim Carlin
> UNH-IOL
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>