IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update-00.txt

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 02 February 2013 02:07 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@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 E6F0621E808B for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 18:07:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 Qxu2IWf0kY26 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 18:07:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qa0-f54.google.com (mail-qa0-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550D221E8089 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 18:07:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id hg5so601830qab.6 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Feb 2013 18:07:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=K+vNiFrh2k0+LmZMjsu85d7UjxMWYB+y0uO+t7wAd6k=; b=xvvPz0sDI0FR1IbLRoGJwgUI0wSRtsTrwFaTYnStRXsb1ivuWCzu/m/q6gQ26mglgr l+sP8uJrBAVegISwlwNSOPQ87oYHN9sFZNsGoHLtg3kp3ahwovm+RK0ecI+4qVxl94iQ xGiyvwRSsKeT2+heV1cwBZ28kVa2cSwNvq9y002/MaFteWIYFrQNyVAnvBaZx5k8q2uY XMzm8OhMO+kG+aA42ZX2NAHiosIo9yeJHvGZUq+eBsv0NiXH+v3atgRsOVybWFwInznL FsRQh4P3LusTKiOK3LI8BJW9UuaD8zi4ZE0raHFlwaKUkarnpxVDTU204Z2zhW7frvB+ ceVA==
X-Received: by 10.224.96.17 with SMTP id f17mr3390608qan.67.1359770867623; Fri, 01 Feb 2013 18:07:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rtp-rdroms-89113.cisco.com (rtp-isp-nat1.cisco.com. [64.102.254.33]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dt10sm8823762qab.0.2013.02.01.18.07.45 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 01 Feb 2013 18:07:46 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <FB329D818C7CAB438F0C7DD772EA1025061A8A94@TK5EX14MBXC253.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 21:07:42 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1FF595DD-C7F5-475D-93BB-EC7E64428EBD@gmail.com>
References: <20121214022919.19971.21882.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAAfac2gCqq4KxCUt3pd5danhhgdPbNCakBXJwGooPx1jyGEmag@mail.gmail.com> <CAAfac2i9f+nA-S6bsoRy58gOn+mj8fnniVPr3PHNgZXboDwztQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAL10_BrnrQbO4Bzq5mE_9s_e1-jtCtb=Nq5wjaUr0mE3fTUv9A@mail.gmail.com> <FB329D818C7CAB438F0C7DD772EA1025061966F0@TK5EX14MBXC253.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63074747458F@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <FB329D818C7CAB438F0C7DD772EA1025061A118C@TK5EX14MBXC253.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307474754C3@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <FB329D818C7CAB438F0C7DD772EA1025061A2F00@TK5EX14MBXC253.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630747475B92@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <CAL10_Bq-zkZv7hD0CVD8notzh2O5gBipLs4ACn3qQQVX8jXQ3w@mail.gmail.com> <CAOpJ=k1vt=ZQS=j-7VPRUYwOOBfO2xe5FR0r6gx3TLtQz8hcFw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL10_BqNqbCuSVX=phGPgJ65cX9L2j0FwRANw8qxDHv=wfW1cw@mail.gmail.com> <510A6327.6050506@s-carlsen.dk> <CAOpJ=k00n2_8DEgQP+bRtLz hGtOL1gy8AyFH4PO2cABQ20PAOA@mail.gmail.com> <FB329D818C7CAB438F0C7DD772EA1025061A471E@TK5EX14MBXC253.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1844B249@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <FB329D818C7CAB438F0C7DD772EA1025061A8A94@TK5EX14MBXC253.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: Dmitry Anipko <Dmitry.Anipko@microsoft.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
Cc: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, Bud Millwood <budm@weird-solutions.com>, Lemon Ted <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org, Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update-00.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: Sat, 02 Feb 2013 02:07:49 -0000

(resending to dhcwg mailing list)

On Feb 1, 2013, at 5:59 PM 2/1/13, Dmitry Anipko <Dmitry.Anipko@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> Agree with everything you wrote. I think several minutes waiting would be fine, and I understand there may be good reasons for such waiting interval (as opposed to hour).
> 
> If there is a general agreement on these 2 adjustments (allowed waiting period cap and INF_MAX_RT default), how do we move forward - Ralph, can these be included in the next revision of the draft?
> 
> Thank you.

Adding INF_MAX_RT makes sense.

In my opinion, the right thing to say about waiting for a response is something vague, to the effect of "A client is not expected to listen for a response during the entire period between transmission of Solicit or Information-Request messages."

- Ralph

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status