Re: [dhcwg] unresolved comments in dhcpv6-25

JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> Mon, 10 June 2002 09:53 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA26766 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 05:53:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id FAA20365 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 05:53:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA20192; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 05:51:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA06474 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 01:33:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp [202.249.10.124]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA14110 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 01:32:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost ([3ffe:501:4819:2000:200:39ff:fed9:21d7]) by shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (8.11.6/8.9.1) with ESMTP id g5A5VV865243; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 14:31:59 +0900 (JST)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 14:31:33 +0900
Message-ID: <y7vr8jf7l8q.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
To: "Raymond Jayaraj" <jraymond@cwc.nus.edu.sg>
Cc: "Ralph Droms" <rdroms@cisco.com>, <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] unresolved comments in dhcpv6-25
In-Reply-To: <013801c20c64$09121c80$db0310ac@galadriel>
References: <013801c20c64$09121c80$db0310ac@galadriel>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.6.1 (Upside Down) Emacs/21.1 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
Organization: Research & Development Center, Toshiba Corp., Kawasaki, Japan.
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140)
Lines: 30
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org

>>>>> On Wed, 5 Jun 2002 15:38:50 +0800, 
>>>>> "Raymond Jayaraj" <jraymond@cwc.nus.edu.sg> said:

>> Changed definition of binding to:
>> 
>> binding   A binding (or, client binding) is a group of server data
>> records containing the information the server has about
>> the addresses in an IA or configuration information
>> assigned to the client.  A binding containing
>> information about an IA is indexed by the tuple <DUID,
>> IA-type, IAID> (where IA-type is the type of address in
>> the IA; for example, temporary).  A binding containing
>> configuration information for a client is indexed by
>> <DUID>.

> Sorry to barge in like this; but we're also hot on the heels of
> implementing (and verifying) DHC6, and would like to confirm if:

> By the change in the definition as above, a node can use stateless
> (RA) address(es) yet maintain (RENEW/REBIND applies) stateful,
> address-unrelated, context/configuration (e.g. roaming, security,
> qos, billing, mobility etc.) information with the network via DHC6?

In my understanding, yes, but the specification of dhcpv6 originally
intended to allow such coexistence.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp


_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg