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

Hi Alex,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dhcwg [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexandru Petrescu
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 6:06 AM
> To: dhcwg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Question on relay agent behavior in DHCPv6 prefix delegation
> 
> Le 03/02/2014 19:10, Templin, Fred L a écrit :
> > Hi Andre,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Andre Kostur [mailto:akostur@incognito.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 9:36 AM
> >> To: Templin, Fred L
> >> Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org WG
> >> Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Question on relay agent behavior in DHCPv6 prefix delegation
> >>
> >> 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).
> >
> > Thanks for this. So, it seems that the RFC3633 DHCPv6 relays (and maybe
> > also servers) can snoop the PD exchanges and update the routing system
> > via some unspecified means. But, are there any more recent publications
> > that have either attempted or succeeded in specifying a standard method?
> 
> Solutions (like 'snooping') to the problem have been explored in a
> number of documents at IETF and others.

I have been down this road before too, and can dig up some of my
old expired drafts if there is interest. I also remember being
actively engaged in the RAAN option discussions a long while back
and sort of lost track of where that all ended up, but thanks to
Ralph for his update on the status.

> I with co-authors have attempted to formulate it as a problem in October
> 2014, and analyzed some solutions
> "Route Problem at Relay during DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation"
> draft-petrescu-relay-route-pd-problem-00.txt

That is interesting. Are you planning to continue this work?

Thanks - Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com

> Alex
> 
> >
> > Thanks - Fred
> > fred.l.templin@boeing.com
> >
> >> 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
> > _______________________________________________
> > dhcwg mailing list
> > dhcwg@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg