Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-leasequery-by-remote-id

Pavan Kurapati <pavan.kurapati@gmail.com> Sat, 02 October 2010 05:14 UTC

Return-Path: <pavan.kurapati@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F0B93A6D93 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 22:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
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]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5bjYUXTb70sR for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 22:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 805CB3A6C1E for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 22:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn3 with SMTP id 3so5555567iwn.31 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ooK80mQh0Ejh+7cDB5GN86dpqKiUUftSlCkQbnFXxkw=; b=Ac1gbE7rcU2szzIguKlg+GWoX++DxpQ1a8P0/X9WV3OlXBkLvA0sggM8/uUcGBxGHs v/acHUB/61L/AjMt5SbKqPV2P65S/MboqwXXXgKXDjVA67og67vqxoFib5fMaSHuYUAz 4FU/JXMQPoxTG904VvDfYhz86WyxZ+vuexoTo=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Fdt4hLMIGRhfko6349ZFzn4e5NpGSnn1lhs27c3lXdZ+Nykg/T1gCoi39NWgZIeZpZ lHDKpNbi75SPz3wFMhipRoGLSJHfxCGXN/la6BCIWVxvmx6sYbDRPJrnZK1D5tbaYTJ2 rg7XeSeyVCL2Bh4Q7kx/FHCP88aQ2+C5jpmQo=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.42.7.144 with SMTP id e16mr7305628ice.46.1285996521341; Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.42.8.204 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Oct 2010 22:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C866B408-DB7E-44C8-B32B-4FC3EA1F8262@nominum.com>
References: <C76E1A28-B54F-4143-8F74-6E8616F49A67@nominum.com> <20100929004006.GA21974@shell-too.nominum.com> <B917ED76-CA2F-471F-BC47-59E7331D660D@nominum.com> <20100929032903.GA27518@shell-too.nominum.com> <AANLkTim1vUrCOb2dBPL6uN1fGQJAVjoVf9m+kYvMez0b@mail.gmail.com> <C866B408-DB7E-44C8-B32B-4FC3EA1F8262@nominum.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 10:45:21 +0530
Message-ID: <AANLkTimxgJBkx9c_a==-c=vn5cH8ymJ8A78hL6=m-Vk=@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pavan Kurapati <pavan.kurapati@gmail.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: DHC Working Group <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-leasequery-by-remote-id
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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 Oct 2010 05:14:41 -0000

Hi Ted, Stephen,

As per both RFC 4388 (and query by remote-id draft),  relay agent
information option is added only when the same is requested in
parameter request list and there is no change in that behavior in our
draft. The only exception was made to "associated-ip" option where
irrespective of whether it is requested or not in PRL, server was
supposed to add it in case multiple IPs are associated with a query by
MAC or client-id or remote-id. If we make it mandatory for an AC to
put a PRL with associated-ip populated only for query by remote-ID, it
may create problems with earlier implementations of query by MAC or
client-ID.

Now, we have 2 options. 1) to keep the draft as it is. Servers which
have anyway implemented RFC 4388  will be adding associated-ip whether
requested or not.
2) Change it only for query by remote ID draft to make sure that AC
adds PRL with associated-IP option populated. Server will reply with
associated-ip only if it is requested in the leasequery by remote-id.
However, server should continue to give it for other query types.

Please let us know if we want the change mentioned in "2" to be made.
It is a minor edit and I can make it in the next draft along with the
other editorial changes suggested during the last call. However, I
think we should be keeping it as it is considering the existing
implementations.

Thanks,
Pavan

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
> On Sep 28, 2010, at 9:53 PM, "Pavan Kurapati" <pavan.kurapati@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have one question. If an option is requested in parameter-request
>> list, should DHCP server return that option as a MUST? RFC 2132 is not
>> worded very clearly in this respect. RFC 2132 says " The client MAY
>> list the options in order of preference.  The DHCP
>>   server is not required to return the options in the requested
>> order, but MUST try to insert the requested options in the order
>> requested by the client", but it doesnt say that DHCP server MUST
>> return the options listed in the parameter request list?
>
> The server doesn't have to return an option to the client if there's no option to return, regardless of the contents of the prl.