Re: [dhcwg] ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature*** Re: Alignment between softwire-map-dhcp and dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6 drafts

Cong Liu <gnocuil@gmail.com> Mon, 11 November 2013 12:27 UTC

Return-Path: <gnocuil@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 30C6021E811B; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 04:27:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.569
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 e1zo5NbvUwAI; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 04:27:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qe0-x233.google.com (mail-qe0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c02::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D2E021E80CA; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 04:27:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qe0-f51.google.com with SMTP id t7so1159646qeb.24 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 04:27:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=owtAlpw2w1ExEN66ARHdbaqfEN7tWSPf1F8TV0cQsjs=; b=vS7Vr7vNbkbZKrmJzHv9w/3VgoIvZp8sGxA0YsDUqO7AqS/18F4fY5faPrFqtH2n02 VhT+/KgCtTGJYYdDkuD3BVJgsEMZAS2G9FfbJwG+uHyJGTNnUZr90Ug8kDc2EY5dXha0 QkaYizwWV0Yq5FsblvnDeim+q8FK+bqJA/Oo8qQftxvxZ0iTdblLYwFpmGujUNhqRtp3 3i25vXjgXh+oopqwUVf/0kpQVE8Ss7YQrD5y/THPyhR34xFx1uzLK0V2kIeTZeAPJfWY D8pC7bL9PSl6Sj9iwdF2/QdDQevT8223juylKr5iamWXj6ppoLxQ2MUui3YvACPRoR03 xjmA==
X-Received: by 10.49.86.35 with SMTP id m3mr46862951qez.7.1384172837839; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 04:27:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.96.185.33 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 04:26:57 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CEA6868A.B4414%wdec@cisco.com>
References: <CEA683DF.90032%ian.farrer@telekom.de> <CEA6868A.B4414%wdec@cisco.com>
From: Cong Liu <gnocuil@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 20:26:57 +0800
Message-ID: <CAF+sHxFApa7Zxwx=BYhtHwY5wcsbU2axexDZr2CxeZhoiHWfTw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Wojciech Dec (wdec)" <wdec@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc7f8a4ea8fc04eae5daad
Cc: "ifarrer@me.com" <ifarrer@me.com>, "draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6@tools.ietf.org>, "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-softwire-map-dhcp@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] ***CAUTION_Invalid_Signature*** Re: Alignment between softwire-map-dhcp and dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6 drafts
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, 11 Nov 2013 12:27:19 -0000

Hi Wocjeich,

2013/11/11 Wojciech Dec (wdec) <wdec@cisco.com>

> >The solution described in this document is suitable for provisioning IPv4
> >addressing and other configuration necessary for establishing softwire
> >connectivity using DHCPv6. This means that the lifetime of the IPv4
> >configuration is bound to the lifetime of the DHCPv6 lease. For MAP-E and
> >MAP-T, this is necessary due to the mapping between the IPv4 and the IPv6
> >address. Lightweight 4over6 allows for the de-coupling of the IPv4 and
> >IPv6 lease times. If this is required, then DHCPv4 over DHCPv6
> >[ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6] should be used for IPv4 address leasing.
>
> It's close, but not quite as MAP doesn't mandate stageful DHCP of any kind
> (SLAAC can also be used).
>

I think this paragraph should be added.
For your concern, I think the text can be modified to:
  "This means that the lifetime of the IPv4 configuration is bound to the
lifetime of the IPv6 configuration."

Best Regards,
Cong