[dhcwg] RFC 8168 on DHCPv6 Prefix-Length Hint Issues
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Wed, 31 May 2017 22:14 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2A4D12EB0E; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.203
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 09W5xoY_sJa3; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D541126D85; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 6A9D5B80D58; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, dhcwg@ietf.org
Message-Id: <20170531221357.6A9D5B80D58@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 15:13:57 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/_WiRB8dEYTicbV-0xzWZCn8P7Dk>
Subject: [dhcwg] RFC 8168 on DHCPv6 Prefix-Length Hint Issues
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 31 May 2017 22:14:35 -0000
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 8168
Title: DHCPv6 Prefix-Length Hint Issues
Author: T. Li,
C. Liu,
Y. Cui
Status: Standards Track
Stream: IETF
Date: May 2017
Mailbox: peter416733@gmail.com,
gnocuil@gmail.com,
yong.cui.thu@gmail.com
Pages: 9
Characters: 21936
Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None
I-D Tag: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-06.txt
URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8168
DOI: 10.17487/RFC8168
DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation allows a client to include a prefix-length
hint value in the IA_PD option to indicate a preference for the size
of the prefix to be delegated, but it is unclear about how the client
and server should act in different situations involving the
prefix-length hint. This document provides a summary of the existing
problems with the prefix-length hint and guidance on what the client
and server could do in different situations.
This document is a product of the Dynamic Host Configuration Working Group of the IETF.
This is now a Proposed Standard.
STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet Standards Track
protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Official
Internet Protocol Standards (https://www.rfc-editor.org/standards) for the
standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk
Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.
The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC