IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port numbers

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Thu, 29 February 2024 16:59 UTC

Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.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 4D044C14F6A3 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 08:59:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CLp_QnCzL_e4 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 08:59:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.networkradius.com (mail.networkradius.com [62.210.147.122]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30966C14F6BD for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 08:59:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (135-23-95-173.cpe.pppoe.ca [135.23.95.173]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2DE49308; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:59:49 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: NetworkRADIUS; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=deployingradius.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.1\))
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
In-Reply-To: <F31CE6B2-ADDD-4DF5-B729-77DFC0A7B118@deepdivenetworking.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 11:59:47 -0500
Cc: David Farmer <farmer=40umn.edu@dmarc.ietf.org>, Ole Troan <otroan=40employees.org@dmarc.ietf.org>, dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AE199633-EEDF-4782-A167-5EF5B4E4C32D@deployingradius.com>
References: <CAN-Dau14nHcuN6HBQsLBNcYkCK1seE4r5iLcg+3d=8WBMK0eJg@mail.gmail.com> <F31CE6B2-ADDD-4DF5-B729-77DFC0A7B118@deepdivenetworking.com>
To: Robert Nagy <rob@deepdivenetworking.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/Vak8rvgQaqoSEYV72DKCeFtNTmE>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port numbers
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dynamic Host Configuration <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, 29 Feb 2024 16:59:54 -0000


> On Feb 29, 2024, at 11:32 AM, Robert Nagy <rob@deepdivenetworking.com> wrote:
> 
> +1 to David’s suggestion. I as well have never found this ambiguous but I do see why people might. IMNHO we dictate the service ports things are sent to (hence listen on) whereas what clients and servers use for source ports is open to implementation  

  I am a strong believer in laying things out explicitly.  If there is confusion on this list, I hate to think what the average implementor is going through.

  Implementation-defined behaviour in core protocols should be strongly discouraged.

  Alan DeKok.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email