IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-conn-status-00.txt

Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca> Tue, 04 February 2014 14:28 UTC

Return-Path: <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
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 8501D1A002A for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 06:28:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.436
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.436 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, 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 MzzMigxiOZjL for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 06:28:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328071A00DB for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 06:28:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from porto.nomis80.org (ringo.viagenie.ca [206.123.31.67]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B1FEB4037B; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:28:04 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <52F0F8F4.4060905@viagenie.ca>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 09:28:04 -0500
From: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
References: <20140204093611.4914.51694.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <52F0F3C2.20807@viagenie.ca> <4B094E1A-431F-4F2B-9004-37D6D12BE8F8@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B094E1A-431F-4F2B-9004-37D6D12BE8F8@nominum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org WG" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-conn-status-00.txt
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, 04 Feb 2014 14:28:07 -0000

Le 2014-02-04 09:14, Ted Lemon a écrit :
> We already have the DHCPv6 link-layer address relay option.   This
> allows a DHCPv4/DHCPv6 server to track clients and make allocations
> centrally in the same way that this proposal allows it to happen on
> relays.   From a management perspective, and from a relay complexity
> perspective, doing it on the server seems like a win.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're suggesting. How would the
link-layer address be of any use? We want to know what kind of IP-layer
connectivity a client has, and we don't care about the link layer. What
do you mean by "making allocations"? How is the relay "making
allocations" in draft conn-status?

Simon
-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email