[dhcwg] moving forward on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-02.txt

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Thu, 28 August 2003 21:12 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA19434 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 17:12:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19sSn8-0001JY-Dw for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:50:46 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h7SJokmH005046 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:50:46 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19sQ9T-0001NH-HQ for dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:01:39 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA00361 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:01:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19sQ9R-0002rd-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:01:37 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19sQ9Q-0002ra-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:01:37 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19sMZE-00007M-5z; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:12:00 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19sL6p-0003ag-AD for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:38:35 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA03961 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:38:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19sL6o-0004Ed-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:38:34 -0400
Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.132]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19sL6n-0004Da-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:38:33 -0400
Received: from westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.10]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.9/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h7SBc1Eh181408 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:38:01 -0400
Received: from cichlid.adsl.duke.edu ([9.65.201.255]) by westrelay01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.9/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id h7SBc1xo367596 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 05:38:01 -0600
Received: from cichlid.adsl.duke.edu (narten@localhost) by cichlid.adsl.duke.edu (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id h7SBZxx17225 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:36:06 -0400
Message-Id: <200308281136.h7SBZxx17225@cichlid.adsl.duke.edu>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 07:35:59 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Subject: [dhcwg] moving forward on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-02.txt
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
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>

This document went through IETF LC a few months back, and I'm looking
at trying to resolve the LC comments and move forward. (Note: I've
include Keith's and Ted's responses to the LC below).

Thinking about  these comments, I have  the following question:

Do folks have plans for implementing NIS over IPv6? I.e., how urgently
is this needed, and if yes, shouldn't we also pop-up a level and make
sure we solve the complete picture? I'm thinking in particular of IPv4
and RFC2937. Don't we also now need an IPv6 versoin of RFC 2937? If
so, can we do that and pair the two documents together?

Thomas

From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
To: iesg@ietf.org
Cc: moore@cs.utk.edu, iesg-secretary@ietf.org, dhcwg@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 21:18:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Last Call: NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6 to Proposed 
 Standard

I doubt that it's appropriate to bless this as standards-track.
Informational would be okay.

NIS is kind of a mess.  it is neither secure nor robust.  there are security
problems related to using it to distribute password information, and it
causes reliability problems for apps and hosts if not carefully set up and
maintained.

also, abliity to configure NIS seems fairly useless without also having the
ability to configure which NIS services (maps)  are used and which are
ignored, and the relationship of NIS services to other ways of getting the
same information. (e.g. the /etc/nsswitch.conf file or whatever it is on other
systems)  of course that facility is not specific to NIS, and so it doesn't
belong in this document, but it seems like it would be an essential component
of anything that was used to configure NIS.  (or did I miss the DHCPv6 option
that does this?)

shouldn't there be at least informative references for NIS and NIS+?

also unspecified: what's the interaction between this and the NIS binding 
discovery protocol?  (forget what its called)  has the use of that protocol
over IPv6 ever been defined?


From: Ted Lemon <mellon@nominum.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, iesg-secretary@ietf.org, dhcwg@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 00:58:47 -0500
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Re: Last Call: NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6 to Proposed Standard

> I doubt that it's appropriate to bless this as standards-track.
> Informational would be okay.

To be clear, this draft is about how to represent NIS+ server 
information in a DHCPv6 packet, in cases where the application wants to 
represent this information in this packet.   It doesn't recommend that 
anybody use NIS+.

The nsswitch.conf issue should be handled in a separate draft, similar 
to RFC2937.   I don't think this needs to be mentioned in this draft - 
RFC2937 is about how to choose between different name service classes, 
not about any one name service class.

There is no RFC documenting an NIS binding protocol that I've been able 
to find - do you have a reference for that?

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg