Re: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Thu, 28 July 2016 15:39 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.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 E84E212D7D9 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:39:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.92
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 c3KOASxSKcUP for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ewa-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (ewa-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.20.194]) (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 F0F0112B04A for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:39:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ewa-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id u6SFdK1f019727; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:39:20 -0700
Received: from XCH15-05-03.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch15-05-03.nw.nos.boeing.com [137.137.100.66]) by ewa-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id u6SFdGb9019698 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:39:17 -0700
Received: from XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8989:6450::8989:6450) by XCH15-05-03.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8989:6442::8989:6442) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:39:16 -0700
Received: from XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.137.100.80]) by XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.137.100.80]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:39:16 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?
Thread-Index: AdHoQoGGAMbjaqWBR9aaxP1yToT6sgAB2X5AAABnFgAAGFzKMQAPgxAAAAJ0X8AACryIAAAOhobQ
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 15:39:16 +0000
Message-ID: <00e69d1c8aaa4d44859f88e0793d2679@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <8c706ad593cc403d9e738c7aafec8360@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <5671d2f3bf364bec9b70ab8cbb9cd2a9@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <9db5a86d50314519b4fcc4589717f802@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <f98d75f73d224798a406084fdb4cdedc@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <F22A046E-27FA-4EED-9699-70A6B3D49A66@gmx.com> <CAKD1Yr0nw09qss1YMi1CLqjH+iYAaVTCP4xZLsj7eNwWyLUa6w@mail.gmail.com> <1eea216f2f914eddb73eeca7903c48d2@XCH15-05-05.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAKD1Yr2o0wyLT1YFx-j=FuZecqpo8BbNr6bZbOr0cF1E_d639Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2o0wyLT1YFx-j=FuZecqpo8BbNr6bZbOr0cF1E_d639Q@mail.gmail.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: [137.137.12.6]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_00e69d1c8aaa4d44859f88e0793d2679XCH150505nwnosboeingcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/vRQqr0zI_y1WrvejsgNzfFI7WY0>
Cc: "<dhcwg@ietf.org>" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?
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, 28 Jul 2016 15:39:23 -0000

Hi Lorenzo,


Ø  What's wrong with adding the MTU option to that RA? That is supported by pretty much all routers and clients today.

Being lazy as I am, I just don’t want to have to send multiple messages to get
all of the configuration information the client needs. If the DHCPv6 Reply
contains all configuration information, then there is no need to also perform
an RS/RA just to get the MTU value.

Granted, RS/RA could be used later the same as for any link, but it would be
more for keepalive-type purposes and not for configuration information.

Thanks – Fred


From: Lorenzo Colitti [mailto:lorenzo@google.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 8:31 AM
To: Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Cc: Ian Farrer <ianfarrer@gmx.com>om>; <dhcwg@ietf.org> <dhcwg@ietf.org>rg>; Bernie Volz (volz) <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] MTU option for DHCPv6?

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:05 AM, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com<mailto:Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>> wrote:

If the Client sends an RS to the router, it will get back an RA the same as for any link. It’s just that the RA won’t be providing any configuration information.

What's wrong with adding the MTU option to that RA? That is supported by pretty much all routers and clients today.