[dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 published

Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Mon, 27 June 2016 13:04 UTC

Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C38512D1A1; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 06:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dH6SDyeSc4Tx; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 06:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22e.google.com (mail-lf0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22e]) (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 CD35B12D1A3; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 06:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id q132so155770775lfe.3; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 06:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:to:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0f4qeorJd1qm2KzwwQwgYFPMFSKeQYEjpza7dM0rJiQ=; b=IjIB4E0NDO936WIkIguHsFR9Qr+QlPxEAv/DaU+btCP9+Tc26+SQXvw+10tscqXkX7 MzXriYPDNY3Gu3WOlt7clfIG2tWZbAFrF+HnYa7p80kE5zJRbSQ2hjqQ0sXBQMdHNUye 0DNbCWlsLbT9j223DqG0QBFZKOEtnfiUMCzpaoIJL/CQIBtT9itmG2TdpMdOeGRYNmiK f0Yj2c1YYJNQJgoyEyh8sGbmb53p2baFuSRQ5LTpy5iuxgsaEA/yrdXVQXVrd+1ifxzO WSiHch5BZid1hmpWhB48VFVA+cYVIRY/7pR3vzuL1XvciMZm7SmRseSn/pDE6ojrBatW TglA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:references:to:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0f4qeorJd1qm2KzwwQwgYFPMFSKeQYEjpza7dM0rJiQ=; b=QxUKICBemif0QRxR5T6yQvNhhCra5bAVUhmWjYpqNBhfo0HjDyuRvr1o4pmCuc9Hzj kmeO7yGOHRHYabfKHaDiUbVjDlmD/Rv9QZDOaYF5LbTfynhLNTO7CxEhk0M2y7R6alFD dnPH8RhdWDI0BuFl089w3YjBblJTUn3vA4dSv8Jpd9zI1IZOhpZWtMEJt5tq/qQ/3AkR 31qHhSo/gmz8crWw651Ubb7dBykeMSWFdap5TA2gGKVFDsXsOQ1QNNjwe6RRwPdY4AkI KEVrie6AFCMCRoTSBhfDcF5Ntn0Cxf8jqrNt3jUEcwc9FUtJt9zBRc10xoUm3QMw3cVt s81Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJEwi4h+IXQQUllDeWS+uPI8Bw8rRXlz1yNGN4fGggYJC7Cbsroyotl/8AP8E+IXg==
X-Received: by with SMTP id t191mr201701lfe.17.1467032655527; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 06:04:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (088156132194.dynamic-ww-04.vectranet.pl. []) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 94sm3249116lfr.7.2016. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Jun 2016 06:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
References: <20160627124656.5276.9149.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: "dhcpv6bis@ietf.org" <dhcpv6bis@ietf.org>, dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <20160627124656.5276.9149.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-ID: <5771244C.4040609@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:04:12 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160627124656.5276.9149.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/WCPEPTalx6236lN4aTVm6s_QV9o>
Subject: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 published
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:04:44 -0000


This -05 version contains the combined work of the team. Here are the
major changes since -04 (excerpt from ChangeLog in Appendix A):

62.  Merged sections 17, 18 and 19 into a single section describing
     client and server behaviors.  Ticket #142.

63.  Added text about single session for multiple IA option types.
     Ticket #160.

64.  Moved additional text from RFC3633 section 12.1.  Ticket #102.

65.  Addressed minor addition to text as per ticket 131 and also
     ticket #61.

66.  Clarified MUST perform DAD, excepting exceptions listed in
     RFC4862 Section 5.4.  Ticket #153.

67.  Removed the requirement for the server to send Reconfigure
     Accept in Reply messages, also clarified why it's useful in
     Advertise.  Ticket #154.

68.  Explicitly require Elapsed Time option to be placed in messages
     sent by a client.  Ticket #159.

69.  Update section 14 - explained that Elapsed Time option (and
     possibly other options) must be updated prior to resending the
     message.  Also included "retransmission" in the DHCP
     terminology.  Ticket #157.

70.  Added text explaining that the client should stop using an
     option if it's not being sent by the server.  Ticket #150.

71.  Added reference to RFC4242 (Information Refresh Time Option).
     Ticket #161.

72.  Updated ORO Option to list Options that MUST NOT be included.
     Also added to that IANA Consider should keep track of which
     options are allowed in ORO.  Ticket #81.

73.  Updated Creation and Transmission of Advertise message so that
     the only options in the ORO will be included in the Advertise
     unless configured otherwise.  Ticket #81.

74.  Information Refresh Time Option is now mandatory for clients
     that support stateless mode.  Added reference to RFC4242.
     Ticket #161.

Please take a look at the diff tool
for all changes
since -04. If you'd like to get more details regarding the tickets, they
can be viewed at https://tools.ietf.org/group/dhcpv6bis/.

Bernie and I will discuss the next steps, but our intention is to start
WGLC shortly. Since both of us are co-authors, we may be able to start
it on our own, but we will ask the shepherd to determine the consensus
after WGLC is done. Also, this is a complex and essential document, so
we need to give enough time for people to review it thoroughly. Expect
much longer WGLC than usual. Details are TBD.


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05.txt
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 05:46:56 -0700
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
CC: dhcwg@ietf.org

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
This draft is a work item of the Dynamic Host Configuration of the IETF.

        Title           : Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6
(DHCPv6) bis
        Authors         : Tomek Mrugalski
                          Marcin Siodelski
                          Bernie Volz
                          Andrew Yourtchenko
                          Michael C. Richardson
                          Sheng Jiang
                          Ted Lemon
                          Timothy Winters
	Filename        : draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05.txt
	Pages           : 134
	Date            : 2016-06-27

   This document describes the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
   IPv6 (DHCPv6): an extensible mechanism for configuring hosts with
   network configuration parameters, IP addresses, and prefixes.
   Parameters can be provided statelessly, or in combination with
   stateful assignment of one or more IPv6 addresses and/or IPv6
   prefixes.  DHCPv6 can operate either in place of or in addition to
   stateless address autoconfiguration (SLAAC).

   This document updates the text from RFC 3315, the original DHCPv6
   specification, and incorporates the stateless DHCPv6 extensions (RFC
   3736) and prefix delegation (RFC 3633), clarifying the interactions
   between these modes of operation (RFC 7550) and providing a mechanism
   for throttling DHCPv6 clients when DHCPv6 service is not available
   (RFC 7083).  As such, this document obsoletes RFC3315, RFC3633,
   RFC3736, RFC7083, RFC7550.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:

There's also a htmlized version available at:

A diff from the previous version is available at:

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:

dhcwg mailing list