[dhcwg] Comments on draft-mrugalski-dhc-dhcpv6-4rd-00
Leaf yeh <leaf.y.yeh@huawei.com> Fri, 23 September 2011 11:05 UTC
Return-Path: <leaf.y.yeh@huawei.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 4DEA821F8C0B for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 04:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.031
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.031 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.567, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 u9p4PLtDbREe for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 04:05:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AE7921F8BF7 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 04:05:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRZ009E42XMQ1@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for dhcwg@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:08:10 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LRZ003LT2XM75@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for dhcwg@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:08:10 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id ADV91605; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:08:10 +0800
Received: from SZXEML410-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.137) by szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:08:01 +0800
Received: from SZXEML510-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.227]) by szxeml410-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.137]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:08:05 +0800
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:08:04 +0000
From: Leaf yeh <leaf.y.yeh@huawei.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.70.39.86]
To: "tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com" <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
Message-id: <E1CE3E6E6D4E1C438B0ADC9FFFA345EA05762B3C@SZXEML510-MBS.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_O9Xot9e8aepkPup6c83TgQ)"
Content-language: zh-CN
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Thread-topic: Comments on draft-mrugalski-dhc-dhcpv6-4rd-00
Thread-index: Acx54RAx7e4AYfNRREeRa9B6TIs9rw==
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "fine_sz@huawei.com" <fine_sz@huawei.com>
Subject: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-mrugalski-dhc-dhcpv6-4rd-00
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, 23 Sep 2011 11:05:38 -0000
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-murakami-softwire-4rd/?include_text=1 Section 4 A mapping rule consist of the following elements: a Domain IPv6 prefix and prefix length, a Domain 4rd prefix and prefix length, CE IPv6 Prefix length, and a Domain IPv6 suffix and length. http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mrugalski-dhc-dhcpv6-4rd/?include_text=1 Section 3 Discussion: It has also been proposed that since 3 mandatory parameters - Domain IPv6 Prefix, Length of the CE IPv6 Prefix (note: these are different prefixes), and Domain 4rd prefix - are always present, they may be grouped together. Section 3.3 CE IPv6 Prefix Option … The format of the CE IPv6 Prefix Option is defined in Figure 2. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | OPTION_4RD_PREFIX6 | option-len | +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | | | domain-ipv6-prefix | | | | | +---------------------------------------------------------------+ ---------------------------------------------------- Per the description above, I think the option defined in section 3.3 of draft-mrugalski-dhc-dhcpv6-4rd-00 should be the domain IPv6 prefix, if we use the term defined in draft-murakami-softwire-4rd-00 or in draft-despres-intarea-4rd-01. And this option definitely needs a field for the length of itself, the domain IPv6 prefix. Right? Best Regards, Leaf