IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org> Mon, 20 August 2012 09:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ichiroumakino@gmail.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 EE94821F84F8 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.064
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.064 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.235, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 02LiJnPeiEcY for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ee0-f44.google.com (mail-ee0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0431521F86B3 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eekb45 with SMTP id b45so1528655eek.31 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=crvofexx5z/cg37UU6yOW8E9F4i9i+pm51IlhYqZZBk=; b=dtNbvVyswYlfVq5TdFxtasmnX48puk3U8Ezkq1NNecsIJrM3/MbVeveAeSinNF3EvY +v4cnebpN9nvWGntqqzd4ZsNSV9tR2O6cjflmtvFyzzmYPqw1pa1D7mbIm/JvGt3QIgn 4zs+rID1R67juls6Z9lOQ0pGpgcPiD4vKEJT/md/GN6d/fpAcUu/YTvDLUH1MTk8nOHG h2JqCLPNldWfiCAxFlwgriUUVUNa9E9raSv9KnZse4Zp9Lpc9iTPEwSgky3jef3dFJLa o9+seIFG/1jINQRfUyQ3MARxM68snhqIpqLkD1xnBbLpqp4dXBlWXLhzdUKQy1EkMZ8o j7Vw==
Received: by 10.14.172.193 with SMTP id t41mr7848748eel.25.1345453464163; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-lys01-vla250-10-147-112-132.cisco.com (64-103-25-233.cisco.com. [64.103.25.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h42sm40029961eem.5.2012.08.20.02.04.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Ole Troan <ichiroumakino@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_63FB123D-6769-404D-B09E-436CBA793696"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
From: Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <5AAE3B81-ABDE-49AF-BD14-C5307EC7CA7E@nominum.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:04:22 +0200
Message-Id: <B706C9B3-4D93-4584-9B5C-C151A08ECC33@employees.org>
References: <0AE8374B-0E04-48FF-B71D-2EE8FAAC9ED1@nominum.com> <93E6DE37-FD02-42BC-B4E9-DF0BBCD06C02@nominum.com> <5AAE3B81-ABDE-49AF-BD14-C5307EC7CA7E@nominum.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
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 09:04:26 -0000

Ted,

> One other question about this draft: it proposes extending the Confirm message to stateful options other than IA_NA.   Presumably, the option we're most interested in is IA_PD, but how would a DHCP server without access to the client binding state know that a PD was valid?   Are we talking about a scenario like Leaf Yeh's prefix pool option, whether the server simply validates that the proposed prefixes are within the pool that is assigned to the specific PE router?

the server may have enough information, be it configured or having the binding. if so there is no harm in using confirm, and it has a lower overhead than Renew. I wasn't thinking of this in the context of the prefix pool option.

cheers,
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email