Re: [dhcwg] Anyone interested in continuing draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt?

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ted,

Isn't it not good to use DHCP options to establish routes? Remember what
happened to

draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option-05 in mif?

I don't know if Leaf's document does it though.

Regards,

Behcet


On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Aug 21, 2013, at 6:24 AM, Alexandru Petrescu <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> > One point I think is essential is the installment of routes in the DHCP
> > Relay upon Prefix Assignment.
> >
> > The base DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation RFC does not stipulate that DHCP must
> > install a route in the DHCP Relay upon delegation.
> >
> > This draft seems to at least assume it, and to describe much more about
> > it: how various parts of assigned prefixes are aggregated and
> communicated.
>
> I think that it might be helpful to have a document that simply describes
> the problem, and talks about what is currently being done to solve it, and
> then suggests Leaf's solution as another possibility.   This might actually
> be more helpful than the solution document, because it would allow us to
> talk about the problem without first agreeing on a solution.
>
> Would you be willing to work with Leaf on such a document?
>
> (I'm not promising that the working group will adopt it, of course—just
> saying that I think it might be interesting.)
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>