Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6

Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Mon, 04 November 2013 17:32 UTC

Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.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 C103B11E8339 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 09:32:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FjVYHcCF17HF for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 09:32:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-bk0-x229.google.com (mail-bk0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F389711E834F for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 09:29:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-bk0-f41.google.com with SMTP id na10so3151366bkb.28 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:29:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9JrJwH9bvojZN5IDzZGs0r9qCnVsPJRkvv2a+vb/ejc=; b=jblOSe1gcXI/3jjn4noEZYibkgZvOZW28zxWxKAUZGbzcoQwvB+MrQ/gVapQxQ/3S3 G+aM3oy+Ar8yJFK0D2gCMlNwfiDfUQs0djbOds2svn/glDRTgI1nfbIruxst7llK2svg y4NlxxS/q6OBcGUloYLs/QApN+sAxIoYgQRTryOPJRpURrqJd4ce82ECj0n4/pNlbIHd KMS5O6NQa1+OR0prY7h8wTrcmkgXSlENz2SGQotcrkLdKgyPpHexIv3UBqCV8Bf4l8cz ZzzLi7BJnG/fohjI2YXzWqugVIxmSaupVMVY1TpNjcNiw5dxhrNDHGLoSW96tTlDJ9Ca NmRg==
X-Received: by 10.205.24.131 with SMTP id re3mr10299542bkb.8.1383586151316; Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:29:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-a554.meeting.ietf.org ([2001:67c:370:160:3044:30be:d1d5:ab2c]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qe6sm16104159bkb.5.2013.11.04.09.29.09 for <dhcwg@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:29:10 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5277D963.6000509@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:29:07 -0800
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: DHC WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
References: <527639B5.1060401@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <527639B5.1060401@gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6
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: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 17:32:02 -0000

On 03.11.2013, 03:55, Tomek Mrugalski wrote:
> Section 5.2. I do not like introducing new message format. Why can't you
> make flags a regular option? All DHCPv6 implementors have proven code
> for parsing DHCPv6 messages. They use 2 formats: the regular one
> (msg-type followed by options) and relay-forw/reply (msg-type,
> hop-count, link-address, peer-address followed by options). It is
> possible to introduce new formats, but there should be a very good
> reason for that. I don't see one here.
Correcting my own post. This part is obvious nonsense. The text you
proposed is ok - it just reuses transaction-id (not needed in
DHCPv4-over-DHCPv6) as a bitfield. Please disregard this particular
comment.

Note to self: do not send any review comments in the middle of the
night, after intercontinental flights.

Tomek