RE: [dhcwg] IESG feedback on draft-ietf-dhc-csr-05.txt

"Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se> Fri, 01 February 2002 17:18 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 MAA04531 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:18:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id MAA28413 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:18:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA27375; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:04:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA27354 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:04:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [208.237.135.240]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03739 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 12:04:39 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mr6.exu.ericsson.se (mr6u3.ericy.com [208.237.135.123]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g11H4bh18800 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:04:38 -0600 (CST)
Received: from eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se (eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.133.37]) by mr6.exu.ericsson.se (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id g11H4bg27190 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:04:37 -0600 (CST)
Received: FROM eamrcnt760.exu.ericsson.se BY eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se ; Fri Feb 01 11:04:37 2002 -0600
Received: by eamrcnt760.exu.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <ZQBLRX2Y>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:04:37 -0600
Message-ID: <66F66129A77AD411B76200508B65AC69B4CE75@EAMBUNT705>
From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>
To: "'Thomas Narten'" <narten@us.ibm.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] IESG feedback on draft-ietf-dhc-csr-05.txt
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:04:36 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1AB42.86E4D720"
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

>> Security Considerations
>>
>>    DHCP currently provides no authentication or security mechanisms.
>
>What about RFC 3118?

Yeah, we should have caught that ... but then this (and several other drafts) have
been in process for a long while (before RFC 3118). And, one must be careful about
referencing I-Ds since that can sometimes cause issues as well.

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Narten [mailto:narten@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 11:29 AM
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: [dhcwg] IESG feedback on draft-ietf-dhc-csr-05.txt


The authors have seen most of these already, but I thought it
appropriate for the WG to see them as well. The first one, in
particular, we should have caught ourselves!

Once these issues are addressed, I expect the IESG will approve the
document in short order. (The next IESG telechat is next Thursday, so
it would be nice to have a new ID in place by then!)

> Security Considerations
>
>    DHCP currently provides no authentication or security mechanisms.

What about RFC 3118?

> 1. The document uses "classed" to refer to non-classless addresses.
> In my experience, "Classful" is a much more common term (e.g. RFC 1817's
> title, and a grep for "classed" in all RFCs vs. a grep for "classful".)
> 
> 2. It's not completely clear what "supersedes" in the abstract means.
> Does this document obsolete option 33?  It should probably say "Updates
> RFC2132"?  Also, mentioning Classless vs. Classful in the abstract
> would probably be appropriate, and I always think that "new" or "old"
> in abstracts end up out of date too quickly - how about this replacement
> wording:
> 
>    This document defines a DHCP option which is passed from the DHCP
>    Server to the DHCP Client to configure a list of classless static
>    routes in the client.  This option should be used instead of the
>    classful Static Route option (option 33) defined in RFC2132.
> 
> 3. The IANA Considerations section is missing an "of" in "..the list DHCP
> option codes.."

Thomas

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