Re: [dhcwg] dhc wg last call on "DHCP Relay Agent Assignment Notification Option"

I (may) have concerns about this document, and am not sure I can
support it.

My issue with it is that it may (though I'm not entirely sure) cross a
boundary beyond just being yet another DHC optoin. It seems to perhaps
extend the protocol in a way that I have concerns about. Specifically:

>    The DHCP server is responsible for synchronizing any state created by
>    a node through the use of the Assignment Notification option.  For
>    example, if a DHCP server receives a Release message for a delegated
>    prefix, it causes the node to delete any state associated with that
>    prefix by sending an Assignment Notification option containing an IA
>    Prefix option with the released prefix and a valid lifetime of zero.

If I undestand this right, if the DHCP server deletes a lease (e.g.,
the client releases the address), the server is obligated to notify
the agent. Is this so? If so, I worry that this is placing reliability
requirements on the server that it is poorly positioned to meet. (I.e,
is this intended to be used so that relay agents can _reliably_
maintain state about what prefixes are in use behind a particular
link?

What message does the server send back (per above) that contains an
Assignment Notification option? Is it piggy backed on an existing
message going back to the client (i.e., a response to the release)? Or
some other message? And does this message have to be transported
reliably (i.e., implying the server has to do retransmissions)?

Or am I reading too much into how this is intended to work? :-)

Thomas

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg