Re: [dhcwg] RFC3315bis - Naming

Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu> Mon, 03 March 2014 09:38 UTC

Return-Path: <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B111A09B7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 01:38:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 qcwJ_vstJFI2 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 01:38:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod5og107.obsmtp.com (exprod5og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.0.184]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EE3661A0D96 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 01:38:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from postal.iol.unh.edu ([132.177.123.84]) by exprod5ob107.postini.com ([64.18.4.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUxRNYzwFtqUbIv9UA/Nj7erMmpKfHYA2@postini.com; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 01:38:11 PST
Received: from openvpn-client8.iol.unh.edu (openvpn-client8.iol.unh.edu [132.177.124.238]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by postal.iol.unh.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2281A8F0078; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 04:37:32 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
In-Reply-To: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AE1D70D@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 04:37:28 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5ABA71F6-6B9F-4208-A630-A1FCB38612DE@iol.unh.edu>
References: <AF7019CB-8EEB-4E43-A5B0-4863D763B0E2@employees.org> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AE1D70D@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
To: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/iXX2G0w71zmPCt1XuTHZuF2owpU
Cc: DHC WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Ralph Droms \(rdroms\)" <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] RFC3315bis - Naming
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 03 Mar 2014 09:38:19 -0000

Hi,
	I also agree to use the same naming since we are combining IA_NA/IA_PD.

~Tim

On Mar 3, 2014, at 4:34 AM, Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com> wrote:

> Agree with Ole. Additional explanation text may be used to clarify that DHCPv6 PD server may be a dedicated standalone function without other standard DHCPv6 function.
> 
> Sheng
> ________________________________________
> From: dhcwg [dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Ole Troan [otroan@employees.org]
> Sent: 03 March 2014 17:28
> To: DHC WG
> Cc: Ralph Droms (rdroms)
> Subject: [dhcwg] RFC3315bis - Naming
> 
> just a perspective on naming and at the risk of bike shedding.
> 
> rfc3315 uses client, relay, server
> rfc3633 requesting router and delegating router
> 
> rfc3633 was written with the expectation that there was no relay, this was for the purpose of route injection.
> actual deployments use relays, and there isn't any special function done on the delegating router, and no need to have a special name for it.
> 
> in 3315bis with prefix delegation being integrated fully into the main DHCP RFC, I don't see a new to maintain the separate terms. just use client, relay and server.
> 
> cheers,
> Ole
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg