Re: [dhcwg] ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature*** Re: Alignment between softwire-map-dhcp and dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6 drafts

Qi Sun <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com> Mon, 11 November 2013 14:12 UTC

Return-Path: <sunqi.csnet.thu@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 65E4211E8172; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 06:12:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 Iy9lqKy3dXEU; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 06:12:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pb0-x233.google.com (mail-pb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE44611E80FA; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 06:12:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id xa7so5254350pbc.24 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 06:12:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=ovN7qtmW4a+1MQOgvDnySzyUFbfr0neMmogrXmRDOBU=; b=lWY1YFdz2fplvnJmz65suA2vVdKTb2PdJWxy15wsZ0TqTbIU8yiHj8WOrReb/QEWHH YwblhXZ0WwI0DbfgTk8iVMkJqVBCWLnY8D81Z+/rSkADKx46X4cuyh2r2uucBqtFtftq 28Yi8gMuP61u5vonBCVjbyk5fRhmvKlqdHDpgr2t0jLCi+U9myLLzIFtexpV9heuCDha oMT0Dz1hN87rC8MUAcYrsO7/NMJ27mG9F3yoh4eJUTQ8SfxTIoUcMV7WkgMzkENfnQbi MGVX5RCOdru2clKnOET8ozw13OYREaJHBWibwR/kME7GUZlZObhWkR/QscyFgc8b4SnP 99kA==
X-Received: by 10.68.232.3 with SMTP id tk3mr30535172pbc.121.1384179169539; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 06:12:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.103] ([114.255.40.8]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id hz10sm31119258pbc.36.2013.11.11.06.12.44 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Nov 2013 06:12:49 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-2--2455148
From: Qi Sun <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CEA68D8D.B4425%wdec@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 22:12:34 +0800
Message-Id: <6310F23E-98B9-4C27-9CB3-AD36FE84F493@gmail.com>
References: <CEA68D8D.B4425%wdec@cisco.com>
To: Wojciech Dec (wdec) <wdec@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Cc: "ifarrer@me.com" <ifarrer@me.com>, "draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6@tools.ietf.org>, "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature*** Re: Alignment between softwire-map-dhcp and dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6 drafts
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: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 14:12:50 -0000

Hi Woj,

> 
> 2013/11/11 Wojciech Dec (wdec) <wdec@cisco.com>
>> >The solution described in this document is suitable for provisioning IPv4
>> >addressing and other configuration necessary for establishing softwire
>> >connectivity using DHCPv6. This means that the lifetime of the IPv4
>> >configuration is bound to the lifetime of the DHCPv6 lease. For MAP-E and
>> >MAP-T, this is necessary due to the mapping between the IPv4 and the IPv6
>> >address. Lightweight 4over6 allows for the de-coupling of the IPv4 and
>> >IPv6 lease times. If this is required, then DHCPv4 over DHCPv6
>> >[ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6] should be used for IPv4 address leasing.
>> 
>> It's close, but not quite as MAP doesn't mandate stageful DHCP of any kind
>> (SLAAC can also be used).
> 
> I think this paragraph should be added. 
> For your concern, I think the text can be modified to:
>   "This means that the lifetime of the IPv4 configuration is bound to the lifetime of the IPv6 configuration."
> 
> Well, not quite: The lifetime of the IPv4 configuration in MAP *can*, but doesn't have to be bound the IPv6 configuration.

[Qi] Could you please elaborate? This is what I found in draft-ietf-softwire-map-08:

   The MAP provisioning parameters, and hence the IPv4 service itself,
   is tied to the End-user IPv6 prefix lease; thus, the MAP service is
   also tied to this in terms of authorization, accounting, etc.  The
   MAP IPv4 address, prefix or shared IPv4 address and port set has the
   same lifetime as its associated End-user IPv6 prefix.


> The essence is that if someone want to use DHCPv4 (for DHCPv4 options, or DHCPv4 leases) then they should use DHCPv4 over DHCPv6. 

[Qi] As I see, the text proposed reflects this essence (dynamic IPv4 address leasing  and DHCPv4 options).

Best Regards,
Qi