RE: [dhcwg] dhc-mip-fa draft

"Henrik Levkowetz" <henrik@ipunplugged.com> Fri, 22 March 2002 02:59 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA05137 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:59:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id VAA03107 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:59:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA02979; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:58:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA02954 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:58:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailgw.ipunplugged.com (217.134.88.213.host.tele1europe.se [213.88.134.217]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA05095 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:57:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from chardonnay (sparcis.ipunplugged.com [10.0.1.163]) by mailgw.ipunplugged.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id DAA02005 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 2002 03:55:13 +0100
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@ipunplugged.com>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] dhc-mip-fa draft
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 03:57:56 +0100
Message-ID: <GMEEKDGLAJJFGAFEMMPIOEEODCAA.henrik@ipunplugged.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <Pine.HPX.4.10.10203201353300.19973-100000@hpindsra>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Siva,

	Good question.

	The information could contain dynamic information, if the DHCP
server had that dynamic information (by being co-located with the FA for
instance), but generally I would not expect the information to be dynamic.
If a challenge was needed, I'd let that be a stale challenge, and let
the FA provide a fresh challenge together with the rejection due to the
stale challenge. Not necessarily pretty or optimal, but simple, and it
will work.

	I would not expect a generic DHCP server to provide dynamic
information, and do not expect to define any method or protocol to
provide dynamic FA information to the DHCP server.

	Best regards,
		Henrik

Sivasundar wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I am a Mobile IP implementor and am quite a novice in DHC. I missed
> asking this question during the WG session this morning.
> 
> Does the information about the FA in the FA Option include any dynamic
> info, like challenge values (or even busy bit)?
> 
> If so, then it seems that the DHCP server needs to maintain a dynamic
> info base for the FA. If this is implicit, then is the mechnism to
> update the FA info at the DHCP server left as an implementation issue?
> 
> 
> thanks!
> 
> Siva
> 
> 
> ps: I am not part of the DHC mailing list, so please include my email
> address in your reply!
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

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