Re: [homenet] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08.txt

"Ray Hunter (v6ops)" <v6ops@globis.net> Fri, 23 October 2020 14:52 UTC

Return-Path: <v6ops@globis.net>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D10463A0ECA for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:52:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.145
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.145 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 LSJC-LU8uoKb for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from globis01.globis.net (92-111-140-212.static.v4.ziggozakelijk.nl [92.111.140.212]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A20F3A0F74 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C3C0400AC; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:52:50 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at globis01.globis.net
Received: from globis01.globis.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.globis.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wQZsAdK4IOBc; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:52:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from MacBook-Pro-Ray.local (g98216.upc-g.chello.nl [80.57.98.216]) (Authenticated sender: v6ops@globis.net) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 70DB54009F; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:52:47 +0200 (CEST)
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: homenet <homenet@ietf.org>
References: <160337182992.8499.7193292073243859221@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADZyTk=1TfOUSVn5RHAQhdigYLppcQYpSjw_-CuXahU8kO1aWQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Ray Hunter (v6ops)" <v6ops@globis.net>
Message-ID: <f642d33b-3b00-054b-838d-d952fa5691b2@globis.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:52:46 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.34
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CADZyTk=1TfOUSVn5RHAQhdigYLppcQYpSjw_-CuXahU8kO1aWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------B607732600CB80FB133972D0"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/AHF82uMxadJC0j-tJ-6w-y_eI1U>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08.txt
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 14:53:00 -0000

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for publishing this draft.

I have a three comments/concerns.

Firstly: "this option is also defined in [I-D.ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6]."

I just want to clarify that you are going to provide a new option code, 
but with the identical semantics.

I do think you need a separate code to avoid parsing ambiguity.

But also going forward if the specification is amended, then this would 
also be amended for this usage.

i.e. s/DNSKEY RDATA format as defined in [RFC4034]/DNSKEY RDATA format 
as defined in [RFC4034] or as amended/ ?

Second: I was planning on using certificates to secure the control 
channel. The certificate would be linked to the individual HNA.

Is there any provision for either downloading the relevant certificate 
given the key data, or for containing the certificate directly in the 
DHCP option?

Thirdly: I know some operators have concerns about "individualising" 
DHCP responses per user, rather than a static "get you configuration 
here" type bootstrap for all users.

Has this concern been discussed with any ISP's and is there an 
alternative method of individualizing the bootstrap process?

regards,

Daniel Migault wrote on 22/10/2020 15:10:
> Hi,
>
> Please find here an update for the DHCP options aiming at configuring 
> the Home Naming Authority (HNA). The document has been updated to 
> better reflect the changes made on the front-end draft. As the 
> front-end draft enables the Distributed Master (DM) and the HNA to 
> agree on some configuration parameters, these parameters no longer 
> need to be provided via DHCP. As a result, this resulted in 
> simplifying the DHCP options which is reflected by the current version.
>
> As always, comments are welcome!
>
> Yours,
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>>
> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 9:04 AM
> Subject: [homenet] I-D Action: 
> draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08.txt
> To: <i-d-announce@ietf.org <mailto:i-d-announce@ietf.org>>
> Cc: <homenet@ietf.org <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>>
>
>
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
> directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Home Networking WG of the IETF.
>
>         Title           : DHCPv6 Options for Home Network Naming Authority
>         Authors         : Daniel Migault
>                           Ralf Weber
>                           Tomek Mrugalski
>                           Chris Griffiths
>                           Wouter Cloetens
>         Filename        : 
> draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08.txt
>         Pages           : 14
>         Date            : 2020-10-22
>
> Abstract:
>    This document defines DHCPv6 options so any agnostic Homnet Naming
>    Authority (HNA) can automatically proceed to the appropriate
>    configuration and outsource the authoritative naming service for the
>    home network.  In most cases, the outsourcing mechanism is
>    transparent for the end user.
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options/
>
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-08
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
> submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org 
> <http://tools.ietf.org>.
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>
>
> -- 
> Daniel Migault
> Ericsson
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

-- 
regards,
RayH
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>