Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter

Ralph Droms <> Fri, 11 October 2002 17:07 UTC

Received: from ( [] (may be forged)) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28371 for <>; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:07:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9BH9Pv05033 for; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:09:25 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9BH9Pv05030 for <>; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:09:25 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28354 for <>; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:07:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (localhost.localdomain []) by (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9BH69v04388; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:06:09 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9BH5Wv04357 for <>; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:05:32 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28155 for <>; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:03:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.8.5-Cisco.1/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA10348 for <>; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:05:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:05:07 -0400
From: Ralph Droms <>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] DHC WG charter
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Id: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>

Here's a revised draft WG charter, with edits based on feedback from 
mailing list discussion.  The primary changes in this revision are:

* Rewrote the authentication charter item to require
   require development of a threat model and analysis
   of RFC3118, with suggestions about specific issues
   to consider in the analysis.  Added separate charter
   item to develop mechanisms to address issues identified
   by threat model and analysis.
* Deleted references to specific options to be published
   as part of DHCPv6; deleted reference to prefix delegation,
   DNS configuration (see below for more details)
* Replaced charter item on acceptance of DHCP as Standard
   with analysis of problems with current spec that impede
   development of interoperable implementations.

We need consensus on whether the following charter items should be included 
in the charter:

- Develop extensions to DHCPv6 for prefix delegation, DNS
   configuration, etc.
- Determine the requirements for DHC to support the dynamic
   renumbering of networks using fast path delegation as CPE
   front end between ISP and Private Networks.

Please reply with comments...

- Ralph


		   Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc)

The working group has the following primary objectives:

* Develop a threat model and analysis of the authentication
   protection provided by RFC3118; specific issues to be addressed
   - Improved key management and scalability
   - Security for messages passed between relay agents and servers
   - Threats of DoS attacks through FORCERENEW

* Develop requirements for any new protocols to address threats or
   other enhancement identified by the threat model and analysis of

* Complete the specification of DHCP for IPv6 (DHCPv6):
   - Gain acceptance and publication of current Internet Draft as
     Proposed Standard
   - Develop and publish specifications for options and other
     extensions to DHCPv6, including those already published as
     Internet Drafts
   - Encourage independent implementations and report on
     interoperability testing
   - Revise specification and publish for acceptance as Draft Standard
     by 10/18/2002

* Write an analysis of the DHCP specification, including RFC2131,
   RFC2132 and other RFCs defining additional options, which identifies
   ambiguities, contradictory specifications and other obstacles to
   development of interoperable implementations.  Recommend a process
   for resolving identified problems and incorporating the resolutions
   into the DHCP specification.

* Complete the specification and publish work in progress as
   - Failover protocol
   - DHCP/DDNS interaction
   - Host name options
   - Leasequery
   - Other client and relay agent options

* Review new options for DHCP, as deemed appropriate by the working
   group and/or the Internet area directors

dhcwg mailing list