[dhcwg] Proposed Resolution to DNA Issue 21: Review of DNA-07

Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com> Fri, 23 July 2004 14:48 UTC

Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org []) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29009; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:48:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bo1B4-0007tR-J4; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:37:38 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnNQT-0001zN-Kh for dhcwg@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:10:53 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org []) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA21128 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:10:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from h-66-167-171-107.sttnwaho.covad.net ([] helo=internaut.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BnNQt-0000XD-10 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:11:19 -0400
Received: from localhost (aboba@localhost) by internaut.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id i6LK8Bn27138 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 13:08:11 -0700
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 13:08:11 -0700
From: Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.56.0407211305220.26800@internaut.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: f66b12316365a3fe519e75911daf28a8
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:37:37 -0400
Subject: [dhcwg] Proposed Resolution to DNA Issue 21: Review of DNA-07
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

The text of DNA Issue 21: Review of DNA-07 is enclosed below.

The proposed resolution is as follows:

Change Section 1 to the following:

"The time required to detect movement (or lack of movement) between
subnets, and to obtain (or continue to use) a valid IPv4 address may be
significant as a fraction of the total delay in moving between points of
attachment. As a result, optimizing detection of network attachment is
important for mobile hosts.

This document synthesizes experience in the deployment of hosts supporting
ARP [RFC826], DHCP [RFC2131], and Link-Local IPv4 addresses [IPv4LL],
specifying a procedure to be performed for IPv4 detection of network
attachment. The procedure consists of three phases:
determination of the Most Likely Point of Attachment (MLPA), reachability
testing, and IPv4 address acquisition."

Add the following sentence to Section 2.3:

"If the host supports the Rapid Commit Option [RAPID], it is
possible that the exchange can be shortened from a 4-message
exchange to a 2-message exchange."

Add the following Informative reference:

[RAPID] Park, S., Kim, P., and B. Volz, "Rapid Commit Option for DHCPv4",
Internet draft (work in progress), draft-ietf-dhc-rapid-commit-opt-05.txt,
June 2004.

This change has been included in DNA-08:

Issue status is available at:

Issue 21: Review of DNA-07
Submitter name: Soohong Daniel Park
Submitter email address: soohong.park@samsung.com
Date first submitted: 6/23/2004
Document: DNA-07
Comment type: T
Priority: S
Section: Various
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

My comments are as below;

[1] Category is correct as PS ? I think BCP would be better.

[2] 1. Introduction,
>This document concerns the interaction of mechanisms used by IPv4
>protocol stacks.  Network attachment detection and its interaction
>with interface configuration is considered elsewhere, for example in
>Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 [RFC2461], IPv6 Stateless Address
>Autoconfiguration [RFC2462] and Mobility Support in IPv6 [MIPv6].

I am not sure why this draft refers rfc2461,2462 and even MIPv6.
This draft is strictly bound to IPv4 especially DHCPv4 and IPv4LL
and something like that, so I think we don't need to refer IPv6 protocol.

[3] 2.3 IPv4 Address Acquisition
To obtain its IPv4 address quickly, Rapid Commit option of DHCPv4
can be used for optimizing detection of network attachment on mobile
hosts. With my experience, it's stable and fast than current
mechanism, thus if feasible, you can indicate this utility at this
(I updated and published it as 04 version yesterday)

For reference, I cite a result of comparison between them.
(It was tested on both wired and wireless though testbed was so simple)

Item Mean value Standard deviation
Time delay
(sec.)        Existing 0.051269 0.002349
                   New 0.001541 0.001213
Packet loss
(packet)       Existing 417.04 53.10322
                   New 366.02 32.55092

dhcwg mailing list