[dhcwg] SLPv2 DHCPv6 options (was: additional option for dhcpv6)

Erik Guttman <Erik.Guttman@Sun.COM> Mon, 28 January 2002 18:30 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 NAA05188 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 13:30:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id NAA27957 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 13:30:02 -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 MAA26264; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:54:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA26238 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:54:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03984 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:54:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ehdb03-home.Germany.Sun.COM ([129.157.142.202]) by mercury.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28913; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:54:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qwer (qwer [129.157.142.111]) by ehdb03-home.Germany.Sun.COM (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with SMTP id SAA27612; Mon, 28 Jan 2002 18:54:15 +0100 (MET)
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 18:54:15 +0100 (MET)
From: Erik Guttman <Erik.Guttman@Sun.COM>
X-Sender: erikg@qwer
To: Richard Barr Hibbs <rbhibbs@pacbell.net>
cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <JCELKJCFMDGAKJCIGGPNMEJLDJAA.rbhibbs@pacbell.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.1020128183549.2579h-100000@qwer>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: [dhcwg] SLPv2 DHCPv6 options (was: additional option for dhcpv6)
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

Richard, Vijay,

I can briefly clarify the SLP DHC options.  These are being
revised from RFC 2610 in draft-guttman-svrloc-rfc2610bis-01.txt
I will add text to specify DHCPv6 options in the next revision.

On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Richard Barr Hibbs wrote:
> > - Service Location Protocol Directory Agent Option
> >
> > The Directory Agent option specifies a one or more Directory Agents (DA),
> > along with zero or more scopes supported by the DAs.
> >
> ...here, the illustration is unclear:  it seems to suggest that there are
> precisely two DA's and that the Typed Scope List is mandatory (and of
> non-zero length).

Please note that it is possible for the DA option to be sent 
without sending the SLP scope option.  When an SLP agent is 
configured with the DA option, it will request a SLPv2 DAAdvert 
from the DA whose address is listed, in order to obtain information 
about the DA, including which scopes the DA is configured with.
This is described in detail in draft-guttman-svrloc-rfc2608bis-02.txt

---

The analogy to v4 option 78, SLP Directory Agent Option, will be 

    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_SLPDA          |             option-len        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                                                               |
   |                          DA Address #1                        |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                . . . .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                                                               |
   |                          DA Address #N                        |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

One or more DA addresses are supplied.  The minimum length of the 
option will be 36 bytes.  The interpretation of this is field is
exactly the same as for option 78, except that it is used to 
configure a SLP v2 agent with the IPv6 address of a SLPv2 DA.
   
> > - Service Location Protocol Service Scope Option
> >
> > This option indicates scopes that should be used by a Service Agent (SA)
> > as described in RFC 2165, when responding to Service Request messages as
> > specified by the Service Location Protocol (SLP).
> >
> ...here, again, the illustration is unclear, confusion arising because the
> two Typed Scope Lists shown having identical names.

Only one SLP Service Scope Option is sent to configure an SLP
agent.

---

The analogy to v4 option 79, SLP Service Scope Option, will be 

    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_SLPSCOPES       |          option-len           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | <Scope List> ...
   +--------------------

This option includes zero or more bytes of UTF-8 string.  Its 
minimum length is 4 bytes.  The interpretation of this field
is exactly as per DHCP option 79.

I have no doubt that these options will eventually assigned 
DHCPv6 option IDs as the rfc2610bis document proceeds.

Erik



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