IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-client-id-04

"Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)" <ghalwasi@cisco.com> Mon, 13 August 2012 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ghalwasi@cisco.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 99A5D21F877F for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id miLBTYfJ1m+Y for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936FB21F877C for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=ghalwasi@cisco.com; l=1950; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1344870010; x=1346079610; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=nje80hax1dh3rttuhrMUPMRQEu1xcOtRwTFko3Mgyio=; b=cWznJgveLaSEJC8DkAMxrkJYDlNyupBzuCiNGsgLg8egAoUkQIg7gPwZ pLrzy0d3GYKg0Ns6PSxQIP2kSYyFU9NqVb4GL1KhZ8Np/oEBnkIsPl2rg pwnCfcpuYIQdYUsTrfPk5mkhvLRlz8aoqEWrLqQ46sYIaQrLl+yzEc6BR 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAFMWKVCtJXG+/2dsb2JhbABFugWBB4IgAQEBBAEBAQ8BCh00CwwGAQgRBAEBCxQJLgsUCQkBBAENBQgah2sLl3igFQSLEoVRYAOjdYFmgl8
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,761,1336348800"; d="scan'208";a="110823342"
Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Aug 2012 15:00:09 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com [173.37.183.85]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q7DF09nn006672 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:00:09 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.1.246]) by xhc-rcd-x11.cisco.com ([173.37.183.85]) with mapi id 14.02.0298.004; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:00:08 -0500
From: "Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)" <ghalwasi@cisco.com>
To: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>, dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-client-id-04
Thread-Index: Ac15ZFIRL299vwF4RFu+DG7rWScoPw==
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:00:07 +0000
Message-ID: <90903C21C73202418A48BFBE80AEE5EB0D0CF0@xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.65.75.175]
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19108.006
x-tm-as-result: No--38.365100-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "narasimha.nelakuditi@nokia.com" <narasimha.nelakuditi@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-client-id-04
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, 13 Aug 2012 15:00:12 -0000

Hi Bernie,

Thanks for supporting. Yes, you are right. Version is 04.

Regarding including reference to DHCPINFORM, I guess the document talks about server including 'Client Identifier' in OFFER/ACK/NAK irrespective of the message type from the client. Having said that, I think document in it's current state actually covers this scenario as well. Please let me know if you think otherwise.

Thanks,
Gaurav

-----Original Message-----
From: Bernie Volz (volz) 
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 8:16 PM
To: Ted Lemon; dhc WG
Cc: narasimha.nelakuditi@nokia.com; Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi); Prashant Jhingran (pjhingra)
Subject: RE: WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-client-id-02 [really -04]

The current draft is 04, not 02.

I am OK with advancing this draft.

However, might be nice to also include DHCPINFORM in this document? The DHCPACK sent in response should also include the Client Identifier option if sent in by the client (while this is generally not broadcast and may not suffer the same issues as the other messages, just be clean to allow the server to have consistent processing to include the Client Identifier in all responses to the client).

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 9:35 AM
To: dhc WG
Subject: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-client-id-02

The authors have requested a working group last call for this draft.   This is the document that clarifies the use of the DHCP client identifier by DHCP servers, particularly in cases where chaddr is zero.   Please review the draft and indicate on the mailing list whether you support its advancement or oppose its advancement.

We will determine consensus on August 24.

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status