IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] applicability of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-ctep-opt-01

Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> Fri, 09 April 2004 14:25 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA00059 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 10:25:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BBwwI-0007Ap-2D for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:25:02 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i39EP2vw027569 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 10:25:02 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BBwwH-0007AZ-RN for dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:25:01 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA00045 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 10:24:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BBwwE-00029l-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:24:59 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BBwur-00025o-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:23:34 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BBwuN-00021h-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:23:03 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BBwuL-0006vN-Cd; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 10:23:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BBwVV-0006iE-O4 for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 09:57:21 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA28032 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 09:57:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BBwVT-00002j-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 09:57:19 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BBwTm-0007hS-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 09:55:35 -0400
Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BBwSd-0007Vq-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2004 09:54:23 -0400
Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i39DrbM20279; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 16:53:37 +0300
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 16:53:37 +0300
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
cc: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] applicability of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-ctep-opt-01
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20040409093555.02ae0008@flask.cisco.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0404091649430.19270-100000@netcore.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
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>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60

On Fri, 9 Apr 2004, Ralph Droms wrote:
> An IPv6 "home gateway" with a single upstream interface (to
> the service provider) and one or more downstream interfaces
> will operate in a sufficiently constrained environment so
> as to allow plug-and-play operation with only minimal
> configuration (such as a prefix delegated from the service
> provider).  In this case, if the service provider makes IPv6
> service available through a configured tunnel, the only other
> configuration required would be the address of the other
> endpoint of the tunnel.  It would make sense to provide
> that endpoint address through DHCP along with the delegated
> prefix.

To be able to run DHCP*v6* between the CPE and the ISP, there has to
be IPv6 connectivity.  If there is no v6 connectivity, you cannot use
DHCPv6.  If there _is_ v6 connectivity, you do not need a configured
tunnel, because you already have v6 connectivity.

Am I missing something? 

(Or are you visualizing the scenario where there would be IPv6 
link-local connectivity, but for global connectivity, you would have 
to use a tunnel?  If so, could you describe a specific scenario as I 
fail to see where this would apply to?)

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email