IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Wed, 15 August 2012 13:11 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.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 CDCBB21F8805 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:11:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.547
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 2c8YHBFmkLJK for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:11:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og107.obsmtp.com (exprod7og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.167]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3FB621F87C3 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob107.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUCugBhg7flFPuP1aFtcrVcmW5vj/mc3M@postini.com; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:11:41 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDA861B82CB for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2BFB190052; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:11:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.132]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:11:33 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02
Thread-Index: AQHNePgJ6EjzoGF6j0KwHUjTOoQDGZdXH58ggAAgh9CAAdqGoIAA+BcggAE/oYA=
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:11:33 +0000
Message-ID: <1FCEAFB3-2942-4D31-B955-DCC167F69562@nominum.com>
References: <2DCA645F-CDDF-4311-8417-3A9771AD3F71@nominum.com> <90903C21C73202418A48BFBE80AEE5EB0D028F@xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F0504A@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <90903C21C73202418A48BFBE80AEE5EB0D40AF@xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F060CC@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F060CC@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_1FCEAFB329424D31B955DCC167F69562nominumcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02
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: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:11:42 -0000

On Aug 14, 2012, at 11:12 PM, Sheng Jiang wrote:
When the prefix assignment in advertise model, even if a host does not request, DHCPv6 server can push it initiatively.

It's hard to imagine a situation where this would be useful.   If the client doesn't already know about IA_PA, how is it going to know what to do when it gets one?   It seems to me that it would make more sense either to request an IA_PA in the ORO (in which case it would come in the advertise) or else just include an IA_PA in the Solicit.

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