Re: WG Action: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc)
Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Thu, 27 February 2003 11:18 UTC
Received: from ran.ietf.org (ran.ietf.org [10.27.6.60]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA25433; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:18:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordomo by ran.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 18oM5V-0007r4-00 for ietf-list@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:20:29 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([10.27.2.28] helo=ietf.org) by ran.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18oM4p-0007kT-00 for ietf@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:19:47 -0500
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA25174; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:09:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from funnel.cisco.com (funnel.cisco.com [161.44.168.79]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h1RBDHNh010889; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:13:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from rdroms-w2k.cisco.com (sjc-vpn4-59.cisco.com [10.21.80.59]) by funnel.cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.1/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA24700; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:13:12 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20030227061152.03dad888@funnel.cisco.com>
X-Sender: rdroms@funnel.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 06:13:10 -0500
To: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: WG Action: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302270928280.10075-100000@netcore.fi>
References: <200302262254.RAA00754@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Sender: owner-ietf@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
All, Yes ... the announcement in question should have read "recharter", not "new working group". - Ralph At 09:30 AM 2/27/2003 +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: >On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, The IESG wrote: > > A new working group has been formed in the Internet Area of the IETF. > > For additional information, contact the Area Directors or the Working > > Group Chairs. > >Uhh.. "a new working group"? What's this old "dhc" working group been, >then, which has operated for years and years? > >Was this meant to say that a revised charter has been approved? > > > > > > > Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc) > > -------------------------------- > > > > Current Status: Active Working Group > > > > Chair(s): > > R. Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> > > > > Internet Area Director(s): > > Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> > > E. Nordmark <erik.nordmark@sun.com> > > > > Internet Area Advisor: > > Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> > > > > Mailing Lists: > > General Discussion:dhcwg@ietf.org > > To Subscribe: http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg > > Archive: http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg > > > > > > Description of Working Group > > > > > > The dhc working group (DHC WG) has developed DHCP for automated > > allocation, configuration and management of IP addresses and TCP/IP > > protocol stack parameters. DHCP is currently a "Draft Standard". The > > base protocol is documented in RFC2131 and RFC2132 (DHCP for IPv4) and > > RFCxxxx (DHCP for IPv6). Additional options are documented in > > subsequent RFCs. > > > > The DHC WG is responsible for reviewing (and sometimes developing) > > DHCP options or other extensions (for both IPv4 and IPv6). The DHC WG > > is expected to review all proposed extensions to DHCP to ensure that > > they are consistent with the DHCP specification and other option > > formats, that they do not duplicate existing mechanisms, etc. The DHC > > WG will not (generally) be responsible for evaluating the semantic > > content of proposed options. The DHC WG will not adopt new proposals > > for extensions to DHCP as working group documents without first > > coordinating with other relevant working groups and determining who > > has the responsibility for reviewing the semantic content of an > > option. > > > > The DHC WG has the following main objectives: > > > > * The DHC WG will address security in DHCP > > > > o Develop and document security requirements for DHCP. RFC 3118 > > defines current security mechanisms for DHCPv4. Unfortunately, > > RFC 3118 has neither been implemented nor deployed to date. > > Specific issues to be considered include: > > > > - Improved key management and scalability > > - Security for messages passed between relay agents and servers > > - Threats of DoS attacks through FORCERENEW > > - The increased usage of DHC on unsecured (e.g., wireless) and > > public LANs > > - The need for clients to be able to authenticate servers, > without > > simultaneously requiring client authentication by the > server. > > > > o Develop and document a roadmap of any new documents or protocols > > needed to meet the security requirements for DHCP > > > > * Write an analysis of the DHCP specification, including RFC2131, > > RFC2132 and other RFCs defining additional options, which identifies > > ambiguities, contradictory specifications and other obstacles to > > development of interoperable implementations. Recommend a process > > for resolving identified problems and incorporating the resolutions > > into the DHCP specification. > > > > * Complete or abandon work on DHCPv6 options that are currently work > > in progress: > > > > IPv6 Prefix Options for DHCPv6 > > <draft-troan-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-02.txt> > > DNS Configuration options for DHCPv6 > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsconfig-01.txt> > > Load Balancing for DHCPv6 > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-loadb-02.txt> > > NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6 > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-01.txt> > > Time Configuration Options for DHCPv6 > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-timeconfig-01.txt> > > Client Preferred Prefix option for DHCPv6 > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-cliprefprefix-00.txt> > > A Guide to Implementing Stateless DHCPv6 Service > > <draft-droms-dhcpv6-stateless-guide-00.txt> > > DSTM Options for DHCPv6 > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dstm-01.txt> > > DSTM Ports Option for DHCPv6 > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dstm-ports-01.txt> > > > > * Complete or abandon work on DHCP extensions and options that are > > currently work in progress: > > > > Failover protocol > > <draft-ietf-dhc-failover-11.txt> > > The DHCP Client FQDN Option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-fqdn-option-04.txt> > > Resolution of DNS Name Conflicts Among DHCP Clients > > <draft-ietf-dhc-ddns-resolution-04.txt> > > DHCP Server MIB > > <draft-ietf-dhc-server-mib-07.txt> > > Considerations for the use of the Host Name option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-host-option-considerations-01.txt> > > DHCP Lease Query > > <draft-ietf-dhc-leasequery-04.txt> > > DHCP Options for Internet Storage Name Service > > <draft-ietf-dhc-isnsoption-03.txt> > > Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Server MIB > > <draft-ietf-dhc-server-mib-07.txt> > > DHCP Option for Mobile IP Mobility Agents > > <draft-ietf-dhc-mipadvert-opt-00.txt> > > DHCP VPN Information Option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-vpn-option-02.txt> > > KDC Server Address Sub-option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-suboptions-kdc-serveraddress-00.txt> > > The Authentication Suboption for the DHCP Relay Agent Option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-auth-suboption-00.txt> > > Link Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-agent-subnet-selection-03.txt> > > VPN Identifier sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-agent-vpn-id-02.txt> > > RADIUS Attributes Sub-option for the DHCP Relay Agent > Information Option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-agentopt-radius-02.txt> > > DHCP Subscriber ID Suboption for the DHCP Relay Agent Option > > <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-00.txt> > > > > Milestones (these are to replace the existing ones that are there): > > > > Done Resubmit draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-28.txt to IESG > > Done Identify DHCPv4 authentication design team > > Done Identify DHCPv4 specification review design team > > Done Identify DHCPv4 relay agent message authentication design team > > Done WG Last Call on "DHCP Options for Internet Storage Name Service" > > <draft-ietf-dhc-isnsoption-03.txt> > > Done WG Last Call on "DNS Configuration options for DHCPv6" > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsconfig-01.txt> > > Done WG Last Call on "NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6" > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-01.txt> > > Done WG Last Call on "Time Configuration Options for DHCPv6" > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-timeconfig-01.txt> > > Done WG Last Call on "IPv6 Prefix Options for DHCPv6" > > <draft-troan-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-02.txt> > > Done WG Last Call on "Load Balancing for DHCPv6" > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-loadb-02.txt> > > 2003-02 Submit "DHCP Options for Internet Storage Name Service" to IESG > > <draft-ietf-dhc-isnsoption-03.txt> > > 2003-02 Submit "DNS Configuration options for DHCPv6" to IESG > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsconfig-01.txt> > > 2003-02 Submit "NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6" to IESG > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-01.txt> > > 2003-02 Submit "Time Configuration Options for DHCPv6" to IESG > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-timeconfig-01.txt> > > 2003-03 Submit "IPv6 Prefix Options for DHCPv6" to IESG > > <draft-troan-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-02.txt> > > 2003-03 Submit "Load Balancing for DHCPv6" to IESG > > <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-loadb-02.txt> > > 2003-04 Update milestones to include all WG documents > > 2003-06 DHCPv4 authentication design team report completed > > 2003-06 DHCPv4 specification review report completed > > 2003-06 Select DHCPv4 relay agent message authentication mechanism > > > >-- >Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the >Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." >Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
- Re: WG Action: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc) Pekka Savola
- Re: WG Action: Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc) Ralph Droms