Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-01.txt

ianfarrer@gmx.com Mon, 08 June 2020 16:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ianfarrer@gmx.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 212973A0CE4 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 09:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 QamIqkn7z42S for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 09:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88E053A0CD9 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 09:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1591633980; bh=dC43L4XdMkmaqX+Tju8Dnjum3DA9WnCdxbN18dYC9XE=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:Subject:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To; b=LK2MpAZdl/T8vJM3SNRPRH1PoiXVMOBU4WdNIkdM5zAP6jFfXeC+lxRvjGi6blMXM L5vW2vYbDTtNwPjspAoy/zDIK9p6Qb5aOIf6BOiH0EyOlSb1VzKFSRjt8RCKzOes/9 ofJFzujGUWCXrAFHo7R3+g1OJaQ/IDziDouZjTqk=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.128.43] ([85.197.53.175]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.184]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N5VHM-1itERS1Dv0-016srY for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Jun 2020 18:33:00 +0200
From: ianfarrer@gmx.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\))
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 18:32:59 +0200
References: <159163392155.1591.14364550477839428172@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <159163392155.1591.14364550477839428172@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-Id: <477F1AFE-3560-45B1-B94E-4A9D1BE0A332@gmx.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:pBMxd4BhDHmLJrZ0Bqznj8RS+3uaGThCOVvn7N0Ny8WWVQwDiSA wXSv675XGVjByYc/zR4bckz73WabedPA1ycLF/o7l+V5b9Cz9Y9j9BEZBPnaJ1j3yxBRKwr alftIJiwRnvX7G+QF+k4XvXBiYlS8sDTKimdbEpjov/vU4jukTiGW783i84DwjPF3/XLuGg 8z5gqpGNEQdp2ATegTr/Q==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:sMPok28hW/Q=:gkjUjg4cq2c2y6CUivTbX9 ocWfMsfR9o7AQyAoB73p3X5BsNkdNmb3OMN6OjLeT75dhfBd4Y6dKSb0qLKsDez8lJZuYEerz nqKieXX6k1bW+RByhIIN1Ek+EUBvc6Ele+GniUDxdGKmtcGLWUxzteb8z9aazWcwyCjCUuRlV o4Uxy/xygv6wvnnhF1dlJGoPdOsKXmT0gbqCTc4yvaM4V++wu+CbuubPrLyETn65+eY6He3AT vOAL7GcWK2mHx0mfSPleY3ACsoZP/7/FbHswKpNyE3pH27RTkdFhUovMdVhqbiT4obdYXY665 TZt68MHUrHVQWwVIXAiqOP5yE8UvpsABEijTf+kls2TzJ1YPlJhN7ltlT0fOccDoQmk1p/Yih 1LXsXzrTgcZdeJGkImJDwTpw7vSUECaULA6f903/LBtenEM26j6FsV+JLuZAf4OJJ+3UhReeI s0Zn4HlUv1la6xa+d/zu5Su5MmIwp3pTTSaqAeSLd/AysfVWVepTuw0fOHaURHYRVulVkMfhn Ajl8tYwShW7Ucp06fvuBChPbnT/yP1ftfgsMF8jpWbkAmjtP17dEtwRh3QKW+BCTLTBI4wmIp yDjP/h4fFmaqcILcB/CXFZ1hV6hjlzJmANGKDhwfYiP5SHrrN6mel33h3Ff/2A43FcKhTk7y9 uYnntNTsdkuQfQGML+xkRwElhp67VifVDSkHkjAGJustdFQaQSvmg/0Lpgc5JDEm/e1t0Y8QO YyHZs6ePXAOo4nvx5lk6xtDV3snEwXSO7IZQCFzJIPJOuo+ufYODO5t4Gvrj/CKnDL73008gj f2vaJlGWyl7v6EV4Fw7K8l9m7DjhZGPTvGwTwHyh20QWDgJMWKAAUgymu61KyExN+QOv+1tZ/ K42FS46kZ4ZH0Kq98gv0hbNhQ85BeKGLa3JCx0pZtK5xCI0ZPR5dKppUIWx3Xk5RcelTybKRs l2uBqWFNO4LfozF7KKwpZiKA++xRh0eVLOS1kiP7a6Vs7LkGqsbOGnps053RJ5OaQtlvcS/rs ALGwq0Gx4Fes/yoXwTEgTvA+BaHWkARpisk1yr/GJPdyGentbhUlUshdG1M8Hsauf+hcECWOk O991sz+/Q5rSukF3Fk7xHJel4KWo+N23ZazUansBk1Z2fhZUNBYy8CjnjCTLr0OIRnnj9UNQH gHHFfxD5QR6/kKw74BaECJM/yvvD9xOaJH0qxUKwChwBsrwjqL4WXEaxCxF2X/7GdKHHYyEdK bPHRMGbS2MBQeZBpp
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/fcuKlLv0WMl6gbuxfPuzZCttB9I>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-01.txt
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: Mon, 08 Jun 2020 16:33:07 -0000

Hi,

I’ve just posted an updated version. The main changes in this version are to address comments received, particularly Bernie Volz’s (thanks for the review!).

Some new requirements added in this version:

 G-8:    It is RECOMMENDED that delegating relays support at least 8	
            active delegated leases per client device and use this as the	
 	    default limit.


 G-9:    The delegating relay MUST update the lease lifetimes based on	
 	     the Client Reply messages it forwards to the client and only	
 	     expire the delegated prefixes when the valid lifetime has	
 	     elapsed.

G-10:   On receipt of a Release message from the client, the	
 	    delegating relay MUST expire the active leases for each of	
 	    the IA_PDs in the message.



R-4:    If the relay has an existing route for a delegated prefix via	
 	   an interface, and receives ingress traffic on this interface	
 	   with a destination address from the delegated prefix (not	
 	   configured on the relay), then it MUST be dropped.

Any comments or suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,
Ian 

> On 8. Jun 2020, at 18:32, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Dynamic Host Configuration WG of the IETF.
> 
>        Title           : DHCPv6 Prefix Delegating Relay
>        Authors         : Ian Farrer
>                          Naveen Kottapalli
>                          Martin Hunek
>                          Richard Patterson
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-01.txt
> 	Pages           : 11
> 	Date            : 2020-06-08
> 
> Abstract:
>   Operational experience with DHCPv6 prefix delegation (PD) has shown
>   that when the DHCPv6 relay function is not co-located with the DHCPv6
>   server function, issues such as timer synchronization between the
>   DHCP functional elements, rejection of client's messages by the
>   relay, and other problems have been observed.  These problems can
>   result in prefix delegation failing or traffic to/from clients
>   addressed from the delegated prefix not being routed.  Although
>   RFC8415 mentions this deployment scenario, it does not provide
>   necessary detail on how the relay element should behave when used
>   with PD.
> 
>   This document describes functional requirements for a DHCPv6 PD relay
>   when used for relaying prefixes delegated by a separate DHCPv6
>   server.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements/
> 
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-01
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-01
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements-01
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg