IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dhcwg] Call for Adoption, draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00 as WG item

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 05 April 2012 17:34 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
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 D60E321F8776 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 10:34:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.402
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.196, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gfv8N0cE3y-I for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 10:34:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og104.obsmtp.com (exprod7og104.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5DCD21F8766 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 10:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob104.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT33Xt1GrkalVVGp3ytOBQ29RL6Gc8NLo@postini.com; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:34:48 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C10781B829E for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 10:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8653190064 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 10:34:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.132]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 10:34:46 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: "dhcwg@ietf.org WG" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Call for Adoption, draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00 as WG item
Thread-Index: AQHNE1Jkl7tgtOxKmkWYH3w2Igkw0Q==
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 17:34:46 +0000
Message-ID: <DDF37113-DA02-47E4-BD64-828C9C5C384B@nominum.com>
References: <D9B5773329187548A0189ED6503667890B9F42CB@XMB-RCD-101.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D9B5773329187548A0189ED6503667890B9F42CB@XMB-RCD-101.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DDF37113DA0247E4BD64828C9C5C384Bnominumcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [dhcwg] Call for Adoption, draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00 as WG item
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 17:34:49 -0000

On Apr 5, 2012, at 1:25 PM, Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com<mailto:volz@cisco.com>> wrote:
At the Paris IETF-83 DHC WG meeting there was a lot of support for (and I believe no opposition) adopting this as a DHC WG item.

I kindly request that we adopt this document as a DHC WG work item.

This draft documents issues that have come up involving interactions between prefix delegation and regular IP address allocation in practice.   If you would like the working group to work on documenting this, please signify by responding to this message in the affirmative.   If you don't think we should work on it, please respond in the negative.   If you have no opinion, please do not respond.

We will determine consensus on Thursday, April 19.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email