RE: (ngtrans) RE: [dhcwg] Questions about DHCPv6 draft 22 to supp ort DSTM envir onments
"Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se> Mon, 14 January 2002 14:34 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA03143 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:34:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id JAA08910 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:34:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA08144; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:19:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA08114 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:19:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imr2.ericy.com (imr2.ericy.com [198.24.6.3]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02923 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:19:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mr6.exu.ericsson.se (mr6att.ericy.com [138.85.224.157]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g0EEIuJ12843 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:18:56 -0600 (CST)
Received: from eamrcnt749 (eamrcnt749.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.133.47]) by mr6.exu.ericsson.se (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id g0EEIu907450 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:18:56 -0600 (CST)
Received: FROM eamrcnt760.exu.ericsson.se BY eamrcnt749 ; Mon Jan 14 08:18:55 2002 -0600
Received: by eamrcnt760.exu.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <ZQBKPFHG>; Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:18:55 -0600
Message-ID: <66F66129A77AD411B76200508B65AC69B4CD79@EAMBUNT705>
From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>
To: 'Jim Bound' <seamus@bit-net.com>, "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>
Cc: '???' <hclee@i2soft.net>, ngtans???? <ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com>, DHCP???? <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: (ngtrans) RE: [dhcwg] Questions about DHCPv6 draft 22 to supp ort DSTM envir onments
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 08:18:52 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19D06.649649A0"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
Jim: The client would send a DSTM option with the IA option encapsulated inside the DSTM option. The client need not send the IA Addr option if there are no addresses associated with the IA. The -22 draft has the DSTM option encapsulating the IA option - the DSTM option is the outermost option. - Bernie -----Original Message----- From: Jim Bound [mailto:seamus@bit-net.com] Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 1:27 AM To: Bernie Volz (EUD) Cc: '???'; ngtans????; DHCP???? Subject: Re: (ngtrans) RE: [dhcwg] Questions about DHCPv6 draft 22 to support DSTM envir onments Bernie, So the client could send in a request IA DSTM Option IA Address Option (empty) To the server that sent the Reconfigure. As one way to implement the behavior. The IA is still valid. regards, /jim On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Jim Bound wrote: > Hi Bernie, > > Our readings are not similar. The server does not have to send addresses > back with an advertise but just ack the IA. > > In 17.2.2 it says: > > The server MUST include IA options in the Advertise message > containing any addresses that would be assigned to IAs contained in > the Solicit message from the client. The server MAY include some or > all of the IA options from the client in the Advertise message. > > If the server will not assign any addresses to IAs in a subsequent > Request from the client, the server SHOULD either send an Advertise > message to the client that includes only a status code option with > the status code set to AddrUnavail and a status message for the user > or not respond to the Solicit message. > > In the first paragraph the IA refers to the Identity Association Option. > Not the IA Address Option. The wording is correct in the spec. IA by > itself is a reference to the IA option as defined in 22.3. If you then > look at 22.4 it references the IA address option specifically. So IA is > the association (e.g. IAID, T1 and T2, etc.) To reference the addresses > for an IA we say specifically IA Address Option as in 22.4. > > Hence the server MUST return the IAs but may not return addresses and it > can too. The spirit of this was to provide in dhcpv6 the optimization the > working group requested so the client could get addresses after solicit > from the server. But the server policy can be that the client must do a > request to get addresses unless it states specifically ADDRUNAVAIL for a > specific IA (association again). > > On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Bernie Volz (EUD) wrote: > > > Hum, my understanding of -22 is that a client MUST go (back) to the Solicit state to "request" new IAs. Request, Renew, Rebind can only be used on IAs that have been used in a Solicit (or better yet, returned by a server in an Advertise response to a Solicit): > > > > 18.1.1. Creation and transmission of Request messages > > > > The client uses a Request message to populate IAs with addresses > > and obtain other configuration information. The client includes > > one or more IA options in the Request message, with addresses and > > information about the IAs that were obtained from the server in a > > previous Advertise message. The server then returns addresses and > > other information about the IAs to the client in IA options in a > > Reply message. > > So 18.1.1 is correct that the client can later poplulate IAs with > addresses by sending IA Address Options with an IA with Request. > > > > > I'm not necessarily completely happy with this (as I suspect you aren't), > >but I think it has some benefits - since it is also possible that if > >there are multiple servers, some may be configured to provide DSTM > >addresses and others not? > > > > We are fine with the current text completely. I believe you may be > confusing IAs with IA Address Options. > > In the case of DSTM the server that tells the client they need a DSTM > address in early deployment of IPv6 will also have the DSTM addresses and > possibly nothing else for clients. Its purely a server that knows thru > user administration that specific clients need DSTM addresses. Its an > optimization early on designed in DSTM (go see NGTRANs DSTM discussions > and presentations) to permit this kind of relationship via dhcpv6. > > But as you suggest is also possible and most likely at medium and long > term IPv6 deployment where the client is best off going to solicit to find > the server. > > DHCPv6 -22 supports both mechanisms and our IA and IA Address Options work > well in both cases and we have done a good job in the working group to > support this need from NGTRANS in the community. > > regards, > /jim > >
- [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Vijayabhaskar A K
- RE: (ngtrans) RE: [dhcwg] Questions about DHCPv6 … Bernie Volz (EUD)
- RE: (ngtrans) RE: [dhcwg] Questions about DHCPv6 … Jim Bound
- Re: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Martin Stiemerling
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Vijayabhaskar A K
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Martin Stiemerling
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Vijayabhaskar A K
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Martin Stiemerling
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Vernon Schryver
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Martin Stiemerling
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Vijayabhaskar A K
- RE: [dhcwg] static route option for dhcpv6 Martin Stiemerling