IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] RE: prefix length determination for DHCPv6

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Fri, 17 August 2007 17:37 UTC

Return-path: <dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IM5lm-0006mj-1r; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:37:58 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IM5lk-0006ev-P8; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:37:56 -0400
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IM5lj-0003ua-JN; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:37:56 -0400
Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Aug 2007 13:37:55 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.19,276,1183348800"; d="scan'208"; a="68288387:sNHT53526422"
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l7HHbtlU012704; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:37:55 -0400
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l7HHbkjO027678; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:37:46 GMT
Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:37:42 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.103] ([10.86.243.75]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:37:42 -0400
In-Reply-To: <m2zm0ywj2a.wl%jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
References: <8E296595B6471A4689555D5D725EBB2104B66945@xmb-rtp-20a.amer.cisco.com> <7ECEF9368E169544B43882BC98EB5D92032DA840@SVR-ALH-EXC-02.mgc.mentorg.com> <m2zm0ywj2a.wl%jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <BF3DEC71-ED1E-4238-842E-0480E1EE4FC6@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] RE: prefix length determination for DHCPv6
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:38:40 -0400
To: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 17:37:42.0497 (UTC) FILETIME=[50778D10:01C7E0F5]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=782; t=1187372275; x=1188236275; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=rdroms@cisco.com; z=From:=20Ralph=20Droms=20<rdroms@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[dhcwg]=20RE=3A=20prefix=20length=20determination=20f or=20DHCPv6 |Sender:=20 |To:=20=3D?UTF-8?Q?JINMEI_Tatuya_/_=3DE7=3DA5=3D9E=3DE6=3D98=3D8E=3DE9=3D 81=3D94=3DE5=3D93=3D89?=3D=20<jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>; bh=SCgPSzwS3E5c7pwukNT73R4CQ75b5vIfoH4luLLfiCM=; b=R9+W9rmwwEg28AusP4cLFlkxVrWXE2fNyR0rnulRJQ6tF4EG8egG0i7m2ibg1SEfBXTebiYJ htX6Nlqy2PxVOE9vGW0T6vRgxogylvAqoGpMOoX8E2uW0HfjVpuJW48A;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=rdroms@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: -2.2 (--)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>, "John Jason Brzozowski (JJMB)" <jjmb@jjmb.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

Jinmei-san - I fully agree that it would be a good idea to hold off  
on this discussion until an I-D is published.

One small correction...the originators of the discussion about "rogue  
RAs" are network admins who have real-world experience with IPv6  
deployments.  I wouldn't consider them as "DHCPv6 guys" in this  
context...

- Ralph

On Aug 11, 2007, at Aug 11, 2007,4:51 AM, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉  
wrote:
> In any event, I hear that some DHCPv6 guys are planning to make a new
> draft that covers this topic.  So I think it's better to hold off for
> now and wait for the document, rather than continue this thread
> with keeping possible misunderstanding or confusing about the base
> protocol principles.


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

v2.41.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status