IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Fri, 21 September 2012 14:00 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 2CF9821F85F7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 07:00:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.301, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 MXH-J3t0Lv63 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 07:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9A521F8564 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 06:59:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q8LDxsat027707 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:59:54 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk q8LDxsat027707
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=200903; t=1348235994; bh=D4TZq+iLAVqIh/8bKy354ZHsBqc=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:References:To; b=CtxzOlZgXErL9jWtmli51gVklpROquKrOZJjkW8E1OVhQ7/652/DZjQ68bADoNiAI Xs1i/R1gTrDruLKCDOUEJ4Ywx6AjB+oUxgVehAsCbSDO9xwfMpXw7hhHWCNG5TkdsQ ARV2o65HhQrZkNV3CPRo5Q8LW+q1tpsoMjgAPZ+E=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id o8KExs0430631357bA ret-id none; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:59:54 +0100
Received: from ip-204-019.eduroam.soton.ac.uk (ip-204-019.eduroam.soton.ac.uk [152.78.204.19]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q8LDxqqN000440 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:59:53 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1486\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <p062408a3cc821c8f69ad@simon.thehobsons.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:59:52 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|54cdd79b989cbc48ef75bbf93b6c9609o8KExs03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|5A94443D-DF8E-4AA3-888B-96AC97E45D23@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <BF22E1BC-0E6B-4245-95C4-95E8B0F210B0@nominum.com> <p062408a3cc821c8f69ad@simon.thehobsons.co.uk> <5A94443D-DF8E-4AA3-888B-96AC97E45D23@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1486)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=o8KExs043063135700; tid=o8KExs0430631357bA; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=1:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: q8LDxsat027707
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt
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: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:00:01 -0000

Hi,

This also has my support.  It would be something we would use in our deployment.

A little nit though...  

The text says:
"Similarly DHCPv6 Relay or Server cannot glean client link-layer address from the contents of DHCPv6 message received."

and then later in Section 5 the text that's been added in the latest version says:
"This specification does not specify the mechanism for DHCPv6 Server to find out link-layer address of the directly connected clients as a DHCP option as it can obtain it directly from the received message."

This seems a bit contradictory - should the first text say "Similarly DHCPv6 Relay or DHCPv6 Server receiving a relayed message cannot glean"...?

Tim

On 21 Sep 2012, at 14:31, Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk> wrote:

> Looks good to me. Has my support.
> 
> -- 
> Simon Hobson
> 
> Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed
> author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as
> Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books.
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status