RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6

"Vijayabhaskar A K" <vijayak@india.hp.com> Wed, 16 January 2002 18:22 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 NAA16592 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:22:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id NAA13497 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:22:19 -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 NAA13046; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:12:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA13022 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:12:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from palrel11.hp.com (palrel11.hp.com [156.153.255.246]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA16302 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 13:12:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from hpuxsrv.india.hp.com (hpuxsrv.india.hp.com [15.10.45.132]) by palrel11.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FD35E00663; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:12:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nt4147 (nt4147.india.hp.com [15.10.41.47]) by hpuxsrv.india.hp.com with SMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6 SMKit7.02) id XAA20817; Wed, 16 Jan 2002 23:37:59 +0530 (IST)
Reply-To: <vijayak@india.hp.com>
From: "Vijayabhaskar A K" <vijayak@india.hp.com>
To: "'Bernie Volz (EUD)'" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>, <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 23:43:12 +0530
Message-ID: <000b01c19eb9$763afc00$2f290a0f@india.hp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C19EE7.8FF33800"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
In-Reply-To: <66F66129A77AD411B76200508B65AC69B4CD87@EAMBUNT705>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
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

RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6Bernie,
This option format looks ok for me. We can include it.
Vijay
  -----Original Message-----
  From: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
Bernie Volz (EUD)
  Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 12:21 AM
  To: 'vijayak@india.hp.com'.com'; dhcwg@ietf.org
  Subject: RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6


  How about defining the option format?

  I'd suggest we base this more on the Classless Static Routes option.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |          OPTION_ROUTES        |             option-len        |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     .                                                               .
     .                           route-data                          .
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

  Where route-data is one or more of a sequence of route table entries
  in the following format:

          1 byte <prefix-length>
          <n> byte <prefix address>
          16 byte destination address

  Where <n> is the minimum number of bytes required to represent
  <prefix-length> bits of the <prefix address>.

  A /64 prefix has the following format: 1 byte prefix (value of 64),
  8-bytes of the prefix, followed by 16 bytes destination address.

  - Bernie Volz



  -----Original Message-----
  From: Vijayabhaskar A K [mailto:vijayak@india.hp.com]
  Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 9:36 AM
  To: dhcwg@ietf.org
  Subject: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6



  I have gone through the dhcpv6 22 spec.
  I felt that, static route option (option 33 in RFC 2132) is missing.
  which is useful for routing. Can we include this option
  also in the spec?
  thanks and regards
  Vijay




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