Re: [Int-dir] [v6ops] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device-07

Hi,

> On 4 Apr 2024, at 19:59, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 05-Apr-24 02:11, Tim Chown wrote:
>> Hi,
>>> On 4 Apr 2024, at 10:34, Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 7:06 PM Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>> The thing is that the host behaviour is explicitly (and intentionally)
>>>>> out of scope. For me, as a network administrator, it doesn't matter
>>>>> how exactly the client configures that address: my network
>>>>> design/topology would be the same. The client can be a RFC7084-type
>>>>> router (that's what happens when someone plugs a CPE to an access
>>>>> port), or use smth like rfc7278 - or smth else. Up to the client, the
>>>>> network routes thet whole prefix to that device, do whatever you want
>>>>> with it.
>>>> 
>>>> OK, so maybe make it clearer that it is out of scope, as I was expecting to find some comment about it, and I could not.
>>> 
>>> The last paragraph of the Introduction states that:
>>> "This document focuses on the behaviour of the network. Host behaviour
>>> is not defined in this document."
>>> Do you think we need to make it more clear?
>> Sorry, I missed that, but the question of how more precisely this model would be deployed in, for example, a campus WiFi network, would be worth documenting. How addresses on the wireless side are configured, how the routing is done, whether a mixed environment is practical, interactions with eduroam (802.1x), that sort of thing. Perhaps that’s a second informational document.
> 
> Yes. It seems to me that v6ops is generally a bit remiss in documenting how netops can manage host (mis)behaviour.

With the PD and PIO drafts now advancing, we do need a v6ops doc on use case examples.

Tim

>    Brian
> 
>>>> we do frequently have campus admins asking how they get host entries into the DNS with SLAAC, so it’s a FAQ.
>>> 
>>> Yes, I agree it's a problem to solve, but I think it might be more in
>>> scope for my 6MOPS draft...What do you think?
>> Sounds fine :)
>> There’s also probably something to be said somewhere about address accountability, it’s the flip side of the privacy considerations but useful in a campus environment.  I don’t think the draft mentions this (or at least has one unrelated instance of the word ‘account’).
>> Best wishes,
>> Tim
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops