Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-problem-statement-of-mredhcpv6-01 - respond by May 9th
Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Wed, 15 May 2019 16:17 UTC
Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.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 3440A120145 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:17:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 emllNU1pJj4n for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12f.google.com (mail-lf1-x12f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC4641200E5 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12f.google.com with SMTP id c17so303076lfi.2 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3L/S+tK5uFA5GuHUvnX3pANZ6J5i6beJoblic4T8LrA=; b=pMlDaADByonT7iE52LXUxS+ycs0u8oHZL+BiCWod+cwzLoxRWhqJRBOF4UgpsqXlcp HhGZX0WLKLQ7TiU7HsNWPT3iMLcYibNZmI1aSUforMMUp7ZOrTkdpp9uhJdTbQBOC1sn JfvpsC0INXnLQqEnAPc3QcBH2pWP4yG4PJzFme7jEtbnGRwQMAZKn0JO+YTWPLVNmgAw 7gG7qibGY7pTltSWuFyiYUtAsGN3h421t3vKCMRHOfkg20cesHs4DaxXJk1h/mmVEftn 6BHZFcGQu42AkVXdkkHqeaWKFVrRoNUnyNoAIoV475V9XFo6xjQSXN4H2PPRvcTrXqbi F9Ng==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3L/S+tK5uFA5GuHUvnX3pANZ6J5i6beJoblic4T8LrA=; b=U6lN6NE/MY4fxYXTbgoq/Vtht5MFcJsUFkQ953Gg8OrhbuY71QWO3YrExHINsAN+Qk UAyz6S4KKfwiGu1T0E2lFfo+VeNzFBwITr8HJGQ/trAYSU1mhwkbATmhRRb2POGyUueu xqNYJoc33v5xujMD6/POd2QjfTyjOIX25Pf0tjtCMcp9SgfVoaioO42NWp4hdmY5SzPd 7cnoBts0iO77UE1Rha/3SUwE4ihoIzcfyZwNKlC0qyIBycApYC25Qmkim5+kF/FBrV/8 YpshgeIFuheC3DI0Y/ZOc+JLJ2fdY3Iz6TOWQYGI6hzOW/gSQD7eR1OwtvWOJed0Mpoh QUYg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUJZROFzm4T+H1byZRJvJcMLK6N7K12WMFqb0vllRhIoIzxTKLN 54aHXsvTYkmsYNZY6xBvQTLOsg5U
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyCjCDpJoChDy5FVRl9CLcCqUx55i+l+flGX39//LoWttjQGpKTGqTqzwmsAe+bevLrDxF0og==
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:443c:: with SMTP id w28mr20471241lfl.38.1557937050609; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:17:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:470:6111::5d1? ([2001:470:6111::5d1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u13sm447728lfg.71.2019.05.15.09.17.29 for <dhcwg@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 May 2019 09:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
References: <d0df3e52-a90c-c7a1-f062-a4c799233505@gmail.com> <CABtDdH0nRscs0uY6f2Nxrn89J0J7SHxhXwjqsRgLqErUJd1DDg@mail.gmail.com> <33D89779-91C7-4610-8530-9F2759C8F6BC@jisc.ac.uk>
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8e5db7a9-ac59-4b8a-1dfd-019e97c661cb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 18:17:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <33D89779-91C7-4610-8530-9F2759C8F6BC@jisc.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/cetEs3-oLHtOvdXNeN5wsB4UXw4>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-problem-statement-of-mredhcpv6-01 - respond by May 9th
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 15 May 2019 16:17:35 -0000
>> From: *Tomek Mrugalski* <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> >> Subject: [dhcwg] Adoption call for >> draft-ren-dhc-problem-statement-of-mredhcpv6-01 - respond by May 9th >> To: <dhcwg@ietf.org <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>> >> >> This message initiates a three weeks long DHC WG adoption call on: >> >> Title: Problem Statement of Multi-requirement Extensions for DHCPv6 >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ren-dhc-problem-statement-of-mredhcpv6-01 >> >> Please respond by May 9th. With my co-chair hat off, I support adoption of this document. Here's a couple comments. 1. Section 1: update references to from 3315bis to RFC8415. 2. Section 1: IPv6 hosts => IPv6 nodes. DHCPv6 often provisions PD to routers. 3. Fig.1 says a relay does message processing functions. Yes, it does encapsulation and forwards the packets further (sometimes adding extra options to the encapsulation layer), but it doesn't process the packet. I would rephase this as "message relaying functions". 4. Section 4.2.4: "DHCPv6 servers try to generate random addresses". That's not true. Each implementation uses its own allocation strategy. It may be something simple or very complex and almost always it's influenced with various policies configured by the sysadmin. It would be better to say "Currently, the DHCPv6 servers assign addresses, prefixes and other configuration options according to their configured policies." 5. Section 5 The motivation talking about countries wanting to control resources outside of its domain is a bit risky and may raise some eyebrows if this I-D goes to IESG. I would recommend using more generic language here that would talk about enforcing local policies. As an example you may give allowing access for students of the university and preventing access for guests unless they sign up for some guest registration system. Besides the extensions mentioned in the text, there are many other administrative mechanisms available in most DHCP implementations. One popular feature is a host reservation, where you can reserve certain parameters (IP addresses, prefixes, options) to specific devices. Some deployments choose to not serve any addresses unless your device is on their customer/student/employer list. Another popular and powerful feature is client classification. Many servers, including Kea, allow defining classes, associating certain parameters or grant addresses from restricted pools and then assigning incoming packets to those classes. Host reservations and classes are often used together. For example, you can define 3 pools: guests, students and professors. And there would be a list of known devices with each assigned to certain class. Once a device does DHCP, it is being looked up in host reservations database and then assigned to specific class (with students getting access to lab and e-learning platform, and professors getting extra access to additional faculty services). All of those can be done without writing any line of API extensions or hooks. It's just a configuration of existing policy mechanisms. Anyway, the I-D looks good. I look forward for the WG to expand and improve this document in the future. Tomek
- [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-problem-s… Tomek Mrugalski
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-probl… Di Ma
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-probl… Lishan Li
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-probl… Lin He
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-… Zihao He
- Re: [dhcwg] Fwd: Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-… Yihao
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-probl… Tim Chown
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-probl… Tomek Mrugalski
- [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-problem-s… Tomek Mrugalski
- Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-ren-dhc-probl… rengang