Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01.txt
Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org> Wed, 26 September 2012 08:48 UTC
Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 C338121F87D5 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.492
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.492 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.193, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OTMWKO8Ff9PE for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from banjo.employees.org (banjo.employees.org [198.137.202.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27A1E21F87CF for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from banjo.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by banjo.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA0F45E24; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; s=selector1; bh=x9z7f9JfloiSuje+/WeJO JEc++4=; b=WKH8t1SHHLcDhCjT5wo85WHWQai9IbibZVHmsgYakl9ejNwWyzqKe Vd3vql/ecBIaSHQnR6ZdMi2SiLq1fh7pYmE/Q8FvDfFqV6OfWkD5owhMgcg5AK3f dGGSocUDHx+GO9fpq5x6ElBwXaS0chEhWFCIOse+oEIdXhid+lP/PY=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; q=dns; s=selector1; b=OXEGHIZg2mO+M66 3VMLqkjtULOgg06pXpcZOcwhpnFJSX1iJTtoYUfOu3b/508bTQeF/PG7dcuooGSn 7onylgs6UUFGWihLh5pdypVleboRnjz/XTfEqaz2NoCOqLkDRZ88Exao1a9EbZgg VfBvoMNgc8ss7Yb5JXCYB4mWwSeY=
Received: from dhcp-lys01-vla250-10-147-112-179.cisco.com (64-103-25-233.cisco.com [64.103.25.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by banjo.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B8C6F5E1D; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B7AA5CCA-2CF6-4EC4-BD37-940D506093ED"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.1 \(1498\))
From: Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <C53F80F0-F243-4A0D-B03D-BDEE4B4246BC@nominum.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 10:48:39 +0200
Message-Id: <39714EDD-C5DA-4DDF-AD10-E06A934EEDAE@employees.org>
References: <4D779082-B182-4728-9534-39456573682E@nominum.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E0F4EA3B4@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <E1CE3E6E6D4E1C438B0ADC9FFFA345EA3C4668ED@SZXEML510-MBS.china.huawei.com> <8AC1BB64-BA6D-4395-ABA7-1F317C3550D0@nominum.com> <D4AB11DA-0815-4E79-A097-F9B408210D81@employees.org> <C53F80F0-F243-4A0D-B03D-BDEE4B4246BC@nominum.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1498)
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01.txt
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: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:48:47 -0000
Ted, >> the use of a relay message is purely to get around the 3315 restriction of using a link-local address. >> the client is local to the node. assume for arguments sake that in the implementation the client is acting also as the relay. > > I suspected as much. IMHO, this is the wrong thing to do. Just use the tunnel endpoint address instead of the link-local address in the case where there is no link-local address. You'd have to make this standards-track and update RFC3315, but I think that's okay. There's no magic to using the link-local address on broadcast interfaces—it's just the one address we can always count on the client having. Of course, in this case we can't count on that, and if you look at section 1.1 of RFC3315 and section 11, you can see that the standard already accounts for cases where the link-local address is not used. Actually, it looks like the spec may have a bug with respect to unicast that needs to be fixed. I think we should do this too. let us make sure we get that into the RFC3315bis that I clearly remember you volunteered to write. ;-) this draft proposes a solution that only affects the client implementation though (that is changing anyway), so I think we need this for a deployable solution. cheers, Ole
- [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01.txt Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Xuxiaohu
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… g57775
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Zhangdacheng (Dacheng)
- [dhcwg] 答复: WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Guodayong
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… sunqi
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Leaf yeh
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Leaf yeh
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Xuxiaohu
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Leaf yeh
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Tomek Mrugalski
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Xuxiaohu
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Leaf yeh
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Bernie Volz (volz)
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Xuxiaohu
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-tunnel-01… Bernie Volz (volz)