IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-lemon-dhc-pd-01

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 20 September 2012 11:59 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.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 1B45121F87EE for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 04:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.411
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.411 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 hwCFJB1YZ8z1 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 04:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B05721F871D for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 04:59:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1284; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1348142343; x=1349351943; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=K0DKOwjHfFQCyr9h/BzmoYkmqLLOfZKUXxxxSwStJsg=; b=EFJvnea+uNdxby1D/4i7gRIzZQv1jNpNyGoM7//t69VaKXpF6vPdmLkG FT9qWVsvozLi8bDn0gRUtO2AIna0BioTocojzBKh7pHyEFywLcfgG3Mgc cnjHGuln9QM1AAAIXYIcJ8Y15pRLkU8lvSiQdZdBykutic7F3h5zNDd3o I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EAK4DW1CtJXHA/2dsb2JhbABFvROBCIIgAQEBAwEBAQEPAQpRCxACAQhGJwslAgQOBSKHWwYLmXmgBwSLHIVhYAOIIY1DjjiBaYJm
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,453,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="123311193"
Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Sep 2012 11:59:03 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com [173.37.183.89]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8KBx3qG016301 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 20 Sep 2012 11:59:03 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.159]) by xhc-rcd-x15.cisco.com ([173.37.183.89]) with mapi id 14.02.0298.004; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 06:59:02 -0500
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-lemon-dhc-pd-01
Thread-Index: AQHNlxU9Vr2+6HvilE6Y9nyy8JztXpeTIHzb
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 11:59:02 +0000
Message-ID: <69147484-436D-4A79-AABF-A59F48F83C8B@cisco.com>
References: <EBDD0AE4-93C6-44F1-9BE0-7B7BE5EC2173@nominum.com>, <3F72DAD4-A8BE-48F5-A640-73915189554F@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <3F72DAD4-A8BE-48F5-A640-73915189554F@employees.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19194.004
x-tm-as-result: No--52.123500-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-lemon-dhc-pd-01
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: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 11:59:04 -0000

I am in favor of adopting.

Not exactly sure of DNSEXT WG as I believe it is trying to shutdown?

This work definitely should be reviewed by DNS folks at some point - dnsext or dnsops?

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 20, 2012, at 5:49 AM, "Ole Trøan" <otroan@employees.org> wrote:

>> I'd like the working group to work on this document.   The point of the document is to provide a mechanism whereby DHCP requesting routers can indicate their preference to the DHCP delegating router as to how the reverse zone for a delegated prefix should be handled, and to provide a mechanism whereby the delegating router can communicate back to the requesting router the mechanism that was chosen.
>> 
>> John will be evaluating consensus, since I'm the author of the draft.   He will evaluate consensus some time after October 2.   If you are in favor of adopting this draft, please say so on the mailing list.   If you think it's a bad idea, please say so on the list.
> 
> I'm in favour of working on the problem.
> I'm not convinced that the work should be done in DHC though. dnsext?
> 
> cheers,
> Ole
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email