IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements - Respond by Jan 14, 2020

ianfarrer@gmx.com Thu, 09 January 2020 09:51 UTC

Return-Path: <ianfarrer@gmx.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 9EE881200C3 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 01:51:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 DRpHS4r6l7ng for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 01:51:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63580120105 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 01:51:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1578563510; bh=JUEiH9hc2TvJufDnn7yDV4I91eU8kf+7tw8xsZ8Ckmg=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=BQ3MhKo5tJvw/ndWaPf2ea6wsq4RZiyscgXIbNiYRWZwN4E8TgONUaL3YKeHvjaqm skorCeT9+wqsvX1DFSWUAtsjgE4etWydKO3YZFYveD2Ncf26WbrdJ+42P0EXfSLF4x MN9lPF/x5VFpYMo+fYybyCuki+1/jeAWXnrN/X60=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.1.117] ([80.159.240.69]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.174]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N63VY-1jmdZ82PF2-016LyQ; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 10:51:50 +0100
From: ianfarrer@gmx.com
Message-Id: <233C0E9F-3042-4244-B687-48E069C0C183@gmx.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F973D070-B544-4783-9271-C9DB6D5CFA76"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 10:51:46 +0100
In-Reply-To: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933031403311@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Cc: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
To: BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
References: <BYAPR11MB2888345B6D3728C02AE410EFCF240@BYAPR11MB2888.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933031403311@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:jz46BtC3Qon8KUpT7RM9USy+0gFMeCyamhVJdvwVVKBUj5TQc5S IolROEqXIUecPnu7QVDK5pMfWiH1SqB7kcczLCrw/5sCSNW2isO/+6AsfH1StDTKk5N/1pH AHzvdD/tghwknb7oGFqsWf+6kVKHiet8lCLTmCsgq1puR1zUXkcN1FjP7or/DwCncaciqAP z5K5A2p+LtV7t8VE/nB3Q==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:9NAy/7JnQtg=:7VYy7oSG0FhUgMsrjQkSAG HJYlP9/0misvy7b4pfGA6+dOXWbQsQmblwu5mqAlufull+WjAFhNxEN4BBjzIEczlhr7sY+b7 qRaiq7v2RqLoxzeJQHgZrQ+AmG8wAhQLz6GXrmaUQnDZvkyozJEWl27e0Nwo8aRaEOVvubXX7 IGgYDpovw5IryeFjEPYijAzpaDQFAQCXY3JrezS6iz6YmZHYGB44u4gEqtqE7Y3bwnm4UNkt5 updZgJSkAQdDh0rOFjd86WfMpSlpDe7IaPK1Nt3PXgZW2ymGufVduEm+QYhr8XuJdveR1ZzLO djigORXEAnl+sqgqQ8L3ina0Cux9+MSBlcjHO26OSbBAaVj5TsyRqhIod8OsMpAwPgXyPq0jY ZDhINHlt8izlYzLnozTSqFB9TYreYAVYUhalaObH7/48BGEI/o57X7s+O+3o8yrAyv4RztdUH UFKxmwLiCOKKgCG+cyLOhm4CAZYfdA0cxukS7LV+iclv1bIoDA8VI8a3AtoSdDh3d3lBKFFGH JUkoUvzZmOnIcKV0JQ0CgRnnY77ZPyFNychNLj4xRsi1Ljw+afab/69A58UDZ9TxPcZe7AVX9 tYN/BDTxUneZaV0y2ahz8L8G5otKclKR34J9RFOU/S3zUbCkrb5sHC6MBJ/Uh3h9lcO6shNFZ 4swXePZyrWkIAvh94fuFVwIhHyv032zSp7AcRiGY5JttulDXw7yrjoBve95nik1nQb0lyzrZs YlSiVsc2o2f8Kb/Wz2oqQZFEElyuHjVlel6SYdn7ANoq3SSQcoRq3pr2qIfKZFGGP8/vlir8X /VlGoAx43DC4qy59mLjKI1o/AhDBx/uC7ZWoEUB+F0+vLeTksb20hiFlM4H13vkfW4hZFf9F2 2+ZSFMK+MrFzIF1E0hf2Q/HVbD9KTMl5PS6jJAiiCViwR28TlZmOktO0ynHKXele7CbpuhhrS 88YDBnyzz1fzNJrS4hZxFU7W3RrdvJQDsmufPuIp1q+Bre+Pj4KTVIEIgdtdF2QeMwhPx+yUc JNQuusuN5PVeOyYHrcq4V1mQGaE8mSdz7QjsA/isEvwqiELnsVxYm0u+HIuUY2RfAcovgqne3 PnfA6z3kI16gee5pYuwIearZ1zQtTtr5YPBLLAA9Uvgvfqf7iKk1ZH8C9jcCiGyzWn3CR+vdU DoXTJDrEeJHsXlqXp9VmtKU/lbn7AtVff2pboIWAVxFIpIzVYensqZxko07qtD+mvzgL6sRyE 8H9zoAJwB2WibTIYt8n0G2beTKoRvFACpMYxVLn7e9ZDAyococgIGGsyfthg=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/sxKZ7hMFLcKghd6zixZaiBGRNFc>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements - Respond by Jan 14, 2020
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 09 Jan 2020 09:51:59 -0000

Hi Med,

The intro has the following text. Doesn’t this cover it?

   The mechanisms for the redistribution of remote routes learnt via
   DHCP PD is out of scope of the document.  Multi-hop relaying is also
   not considered as the functionality is solely required by a DHCP
   relay agent that is co-located with the first-hop router that the
   DHCPv6 client requesting the prefix is connected to.

Thanks,
Ian


> On 9. Jan 2020, at 10:35, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Bernie, all,
>  
> I support.
>  
> For the routing part, the draft may clarify that it focuses on the client-facing interface and not the one covered, e.g., in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt-03 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt-03>.
>                                                      
> Cheers,
> Med
>  
> De : dhcwg [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Bernie Volz (volz)
> Envoyé : dimanche 29 décembre 2019 17:03
> À : dhcwg@ietf.org
> Objet : [dhcwg] Adoption Call for draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements - Respond by Jan 14, 2020
>  
> Hello:
>  
> As follow up from the IETF-106 DHC WG meeting, we are initiating the WG call for adoption onhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements/ <https://datatracker.ietf..org/doc/draft-fkhp-dhc-dhcpv6-pd-relay-requirements/> (DHCPv6 Prefix Delegating Relay). This document was presented at IETF-106 – see https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/slides-106-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-delegating-relay-00 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/slides-106-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-delegating-relay-00>.
>  
> This starts the call for Adoption of this document. Please respond by January 14, 2020.
>  
> Thanks in advance for your consideration of whether the WG should or should not adopt this document as a work item.
>  
> And, Happy New Year!
>  
> Tomek & Bernie
>  
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email