Re: [dhcwg] WG Adoption Call - draft-raghuvanshi-dhc-dhcpv6-active-leasequery-00 - Ends November 25, 2013

Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Tue, 19 November 2013 10:51 UTC

Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E565C1ADDD0 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:51:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 xt_AyyYk8dYh for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:51:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-x234.google.com (mail-ee0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE291ADBF7 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:51:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ee0-f52.google.com with SMTP id l10so3085561eei.25 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:51:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ujuafA57aTxC1fq/Zftp1aSNrG6J8SJmLfX6A+i4n7I=; b=oHK4oCiQ9+pmGo+NDb6fgqNgr9ZVHFAQ63EsSfwcklTUmWZQmnId22GYMBKCePgtW1 Oh9GLH8BznpPkYNUOQ/NuPVUo3BYzqykQpIf92DOZARwqnClDyaDgWIvrab8gGLvGDdN pKaWgSXn5Rbs264bBgChOAGEMuGTSwpciPtvl972G/JrvX+Q7KEQK1Hq1BSun2mzGRxi tcfs0+L3WHFYa0Q6Ntpg5AC+zvGfmJM6ZWLxkDCQ51PDdpd9/7rI5wqD7r/VyfJXyqOL UtytdT5jqnyC2TVm6BK/ADCio1agvgPJQMO5NcsdN3gurH4WWBMhD/srCvEjP3MsC+m+ Vy7g==
X-Received: by 10.14.216.68 with SMTP id f44mr27922581eep.6.1384858291226; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:51:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:470:6061:0:f66d:4ff:fe96:58f2? ([2001:470:6061:0:f66d:4ff:fe96:58f2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id h8sm47431836eew.16.2013.11.19.02.51.29 for <dhcwg@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:51:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <528B42B0.4020005@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:51:28 +0100
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
References: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1AD89A8C@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1AD89A8C@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
X-TagToolbar-Keys: D20131119115128749
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WG Adoption Call - draft-raghuvanshi-dhc-dhcpv6-active-leasequery-00 - Ends November 25, 2013
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 10:51:42 -0000

On 11.11.2013 17:03, Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:
> At the Vancouver IETF DHC WG session, there was support for adopting
> draft-raghuvanshi-dhc-dhcpv6-active-leasequery-00. (You can view the
> presentation given by Kim Kinnear at
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/slides/slides-88-dhc-2.pptx.)
> 
> This call is being initiated to confirm whether there is indeed WG
> consensus to adopt this work as DHC WG item. Please state whether or not
> you're in favor of the adoption by replying to this mail.
(chair hat off)

As a regular participant, I support adoption of this document.

I haven't thoroughly read the draft yet, just browsed it quickly and
have 2 minor editorial comments:

1. abstract/introduction uses 'client' to name the entity that sends
leasequery requests. One can argue that requestor is a special type of a
client, so technically the text is correct, but 'client' context usually
means end device in DHCP. It is better to use term 'requestor' as
defined in RFC5007.

2. Options that define time must be more explicit. They should say that
the content specifies number of seconds since some specific point in
time. If you don't have any strong preference, I suggest to use the same
as with DUID-LLT: seconds since midnight 1 Jan 2000 UTC modulo 2^32.

I hope to do a more thorough review at a later date.

Tomek