Re: [HOKEY] [dhcwg] Fw: draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery WGLC ends

[Qin Wu <[e-mail]>]

Hi,
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ted Lemon" <[e-mail]>
To: "Qin Wu" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "Glen Zorn" <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [HOKEY] [dhcwg] Fw: draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery WGLC ends


On Sep 13, 2010, at 2:57 AM, Qin Wu wrote:
> Sorry for late reply.
> It think draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery intend to address two different cases:
> case 1: DHCP server have the information, DHCP Client request information directly from DHCP server
> case 2: DHCP server didn't have the information, but DHCP relay have. DHCP Relay provides information to the client through DHCP server.
> Therefore it seems reasonable to have one common option to address both cases in the inter-authenticator handover scenario.

I can't tell from this response whether you are agreeing to use the mechanism described in the relay-supplied options draft or not.   Could you clarify?

[Qin]: For the case 1, we don't need relay-supplied options since client can request informtaion directly from server using LDN option defined in 
          draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery.
          For the case 2, we have two options:
          (a) Relay include information in the  LDN option defined in draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery and forward to the server
          (b)  Relay Encapsulate LDN option into relay-supplied options and forward relay-supplied options to the server.
         I think both options works in the case 2. but comparing with their difference, relay-supplied options is more generic and reusable.
         
BTW: If you look at the history of draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery, one revelant draft to draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery(i.e., http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-   wang-dhc-ldn-option-00) was discussed  in DHC WG early at IETF 74 and has the similar idea to relay-supplied options.