Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02

"Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com> Tue, 14 August 2012 08:02 UTC

Return-Path: <leo.liubing@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 E3E2E21F85AC for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 01:02:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.306
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.306 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.293, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 MidkpesFtfhK for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 01:02:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB6421F86D1 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 01:02:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfwdlp03-ep.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AIV89117; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:02:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DFWEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) by dfweml201-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.107) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:58:41 -0700
Received: from SZXEML429-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.72.61.37) by dfweml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:58:44 -0700
Received: from SZXEML509-MBS.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.53]) by SZXEML429-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.72.61.37]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 14 Aug 2012 15:58:37 +0800
From: "Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>, dhc WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02
Thread-Index: AQHNePgJ6EjzoGF6j0KwHUjTOoQDGZdY5bRA
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 07:58:36 +0000
Message-ID: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F452932EAEC@szxeml509-mbs>
References: <2DCA645F-CDDF-4311-8417-3A9771AD3F71@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <2DCA645F-CDDF-4311-8417-3A9771AD3F71@nominum.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.99.42]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02
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: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 08:02:47 -0000

Support advancing it. Few minor comments:

Section 3, first paragraph. It is not proper to say routers can "specify" the hosts should use DHCPv6 and/or stateless address configuration. In fact the RFC4862 doesn't clearly defined the hosts should interpret the M/O flags as prescriptive, but just advisory. In other word, it is not determined by the routers, but the hosts themselves. 

In last paragraph of section 4, what is the "address registration procedure"? Do you mean the procedure defined in draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration ? If it is, it's better to add a reference.


-----Original Message-----
From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 10:05 AM
To: dhc WG
Subject: [dhcwg] WGLC: draft-ietf-dhc-host-gen-id-02

The authors have requested a working group last call for this draft.   The draft provides a mechanism whereby the DHCP server can indicate to the DHCP client which prefix it should use for autoconfiguration, for instance for CGA address generation.   This draft has been hanging around for a while, and could definitely use more eyes on it.   Please take the time to review it; if you think it's a good idea, please indicate your support for advancing the draft.   If you think it's a bad idea, please indicate that you do not support advancing it.   If you have comments, they would be very much appreciated.

We will determine consensus on August 27.

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg