Re: [dhcwg] Question on relay agent behavior in DHCPv6 prefix delegation

Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com> Mon, 03 February 2014 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <akostur@incognito.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7A141A01CF for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:35:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.579
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Vr48BIhx3s41 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:35:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na3sys010aog105.obsmtp.com (na3sys010aog105.obsmtp.com [74.125.245.78]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F0B3B1A016D for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:35:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.212.41]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys010aob105.postini.com ([74.125.244.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUu/TZaaQRFGo4bVTzIXDfG5zPV8cFn2h@postini.com; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:35:34 PST
Received: by mail-vb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id g10so4893050vbg.14 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:35:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=gpKUNoY4RFTIgAPqc9PKJqGufdYzDoqdqZO/gYWneFo=; b=Pwck5an74QzXuIwv/bLkOF9XMkBhDQOWf5Q7dL3l4KHZ4kGNU1OVWKDI6l9K+WTyLU LJlx6DbchExYV2gMayk+unUlS8e6c8W00LAS5v8Bdsx5lM5MZ4/0PHQJRUdrwlSiSh0u 0H8z04VjGi1oCQJm2Fw2IwwYPEAymCeAAuKKxu6LpAyOTizrC1FasiBMUKcD9yVQpbC8 G+5iDAkKFE5R+ZtLh/Vq8BIW1R1PP+t3l51UuCQs3KCQntMAATkmYZslMydxMtuQIJ4R NgNfwX7KveVG2wxLuM+PFHb9ApzstdSKGT31OIUG7snejnLdfueVmPizVr5ZuD1+l6e2 YxGg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl8p5A1uiMI6SMFQpM1SrBXnzoXgaS1ux81E2xqpsfBC2WPNyuaWfg7zGoZH0sstQfDDOyUt6EgKyd1USXCaMhs7poMcCU19LFunbuq1IKRNEF64fPhthoZs1E9T317vqznrBA/KsLOxbL0lHBZCGUZfAS9TA==
X-Received: by 10.221.24.200 with SMTP id rf8mr62335vcb.65.1391448933239; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:35:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.221.24.200 with SMTP id rf8mr62328vcb.65.1391448933156; Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:35:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.221.16.138 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:35:33 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181C095B@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181C095B@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 09:35:33 -0800
Message-ID: <CAL10_BpTKHhfux8H7oYGuLYKEhZ5XQe7EokH_==2zCwBQFuPJw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com>
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org WG" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Question on relay agent behavior in DHCPv6 prefix delegation
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 17:35:36 -0000

The RFC doesn't get into details since it may not even be the
delegating router doing the route updates.   As an example, in a cable
network, it may be the CMTS (who plays the role of Relay Agent from
DHCPv6's perspective) who is snooping the PD traffic and may emit the
appropriate routing updates into the network (using some other
standard dynamic routing protocol such as OSPF).


On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Templin, Fred L
<Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> Hi, RFC3633 says:
>
> "14.  Relay agent behavior
>
>    A relay agent forwards messages containing Prefix Delegation options
>    in the same way as described in section 20, "Relay Agent Behavior" of
>    RFC 3315.
>
>    If a delegating router communicates with a requesting router through
>    a relay agent, the delegating router may need a protocol or other
>    out-of-band communication to add routing information for delegated
>    prefixes into the provider edge router."
>
> My question is, since the publication of RFC3633 has there been a
> new RFC published that specifies "a protocol or other out-of-band
> communication to add routing information"?
>
> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg



-- 
Andre Kostur