IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dhcwg] Follow up from IETF-95 - draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 21 April 2016 16:45 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.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 8E8ED12DC4F for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 09:45:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.516
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ysfpj-xJg0_e for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 09:45:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2452712D1D1 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 09:45:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8479; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1461257118; x=1462466718; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=aj/QjsyQWhAlkp09aIgKhaKPrGMzYcAwji5ud5GypAo=; b=cWkBFXvBwuNXnsBvEG7IaKkIdJEdmptcNPQSDhBbgW0uNaBROBCa/i/o 5hDibD8HyVtYT7YPy9qFpON5F/uoEdWMZGJAjVBHQaQWoFFosEi0Duibl SxI8HPAcdDVOAkGhgbx3+I7rhToCnEmvt/T0VU6X/cuS3QnNduKNOUoxn E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0A7AgAqAxlX/5JdJa1egmxMU4EDtHuCY4IPAQ2Bc4dDOBQBAQEBAQEBZRwLhEgtXgGBACYBBBuIIp8woHoBAQEBBgEBAQEBARqVAQWTHoRxAYEtjF+BbYRNiF2GI4kJAR4BAUKDaIhkfgEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.24,513,1454976000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="99769639"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Apr 2016 16:45:18 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (xch-rcd-005.cisco.com [173.37.102.15]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u3LGjImG003897 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:45:18 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com (173.36.7.13) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 11:45:17 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) by XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com ([173.36.7.13]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 11:45:17 -0500
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Follow up from IETF-95 - draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue
Thread-Index: AdGb7R0TyBAg+bfuQhK82oWwAy+O+A==
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:45:17 +0000
Message-ID: <0a8817dba2ea46c88ca67334a11c956d@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.131.77.252]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0a8817dba2ea46c88ca67334a11c956dXCHALN003ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/s1P8Ygnf8_6T7ABtXxyP7gAuTLQ>
Subject: [dhcwg] Follow up from IETF-95 - draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:45:20 -0000

Hi:

One item that was raised at the IETF-95 DHC WG session was the recent change (suggested by me before draft-cui-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-02 was published) to switch draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue to Informational rather than Standards Track. Marcin Siodelski suggested that the document be Standards Track:

The brief (draft) minutes for this discuss are:

---
5. DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues, Bernie Volz (for Tianxiang Li) - 10 minutes, 14:50
    draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue

    The authors believe work is ready for WGLC.

    Ian: Is this now informational? "This is the suggested way to do it"?
    Bernie: Correct. There were some discussions and the conclusion was to not
       enforce it.
    Marcin (on jabber): I'd suggest this is standards track doc with normative language
       in. Otherwise implementations will ignore hints.
---

Once we resolve this open question (and after a possible update to the document), we intend to start a WGLC on the document.

Please respond with your comments as to whether this document should be Informational or Standards Track by May 5th, 2016. Of course, any other comments are welcome as well!

Thanks!


-          Tomek & Bernie

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email