IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Linux & draft-gont-6man-slaac-dns-config-issues

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Wed, 25 March 2015 18:41 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A98D1B2AAA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:41:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 dUXevQuUSBLZ for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:41:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com (mail-wi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EA431B2AAB for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibg7 with SMTP id g7so81011614wib.1 for <6man@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XFJN8qYGE9YzlXLhzH4MLs8ocL0UZEu/m3aR483e0hI=; b=m49aTvmjPM/qFR/Wlju/AcbcVGweg9pdVWDDZ/i3zRLP+pF4Qm/3NjYkiH9IPEAQYG uxbaIu1G49cse338SQ1FGEbcP4NPhjLR0gAoA5ob/S6JK1MusNAazcbt6mCcQf/RZpNf 76G1LQrY9b4taiqmfxlwMmkKkyZffTb6t6TDhPyEOhcq5SwIn5esRGsd+KE2Hlg+KhHx sc9pnk2TqwT34+0lQS804rsOwkZbPp8PAqtdR5nWrPqJWcP/yDhcmYU3fOJGJs0xPXE1 n0uCN8KK7hmQqU8+n+h2cEVJxBlkPzzO65H1ggR+8IJROLWoe18TIzKonZ69ah5Lfrdg iZuQ==
X-Received: by 10.194.221.100 with SMTP id qd4mr20030429wjc.113.1427308889348; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.58.76 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr24MkikxdYAP0KfnB_gXOyVm7+QuZi-m+cc0_NccVn-JQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <55102C6B.1060608@si6networks.com> <CAKD1Yr2XfeSuQAj94kN1AF_8cet2L+uEkJnO59NyYgtwyfXu7A@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3YBdjSkwgoAzTXs_dvoiRnSFReE5-fAO7RggvVLwDthw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFU7BASXNe6TXWt7R2+tBjiob8n23VpBV5THV5hJxSHV-wKo5A@mail.gmail.com> <55118F3B.3000308@si6networks.com> <CAFU7BAQX95WmBu1r=yp38pZ3tEBrxdEX32cvHE7A8AkLjESSEA@mail.gmail.com> <5511EF4C.1050908@si6networks.com> <D118FE45-676C-4BAC-91D3-34A0224F7432@employees.org> <9DCE78EF-2377-45DF-8EE7-BF52365425FF@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr24MkikxdYAP0KfnB_gXOyVm7+QuZi-m+cc0_NccVn-JQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 19:41:09 +0100
Message-ID: <CAFU7BARMk7==0uh8=v=hE+Fi_541dq4ZQE2=9AzbB-kc57wLcA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Linux & draft-gont-6man-slaac-dns-config-issues
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/XMGdq3asHBP4AFIG_YNwjJOVS3I>
Cc: draft-gont-6man-slaac-dns-config-issues@tools.ietf.org, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 18:41:39 -0000

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> I disagree. Why place any limits at all? Why is it incorrect to specify a
> higher lifetime for the DNS servers than the router lifetime?

Ah, I think the wording is confusing. We should say 'the default value
should be Router Lifetime' and *remove* the upper limit.

>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:
>>
>> rather:
>> “the value of the Lifetime SHOULD by default be bounded by Router
>> Lifetime”.
>>
>> > with e.g. “the value of the Lifetime SHOULD be bounded by Router
>> > Lifetime”.
>> >
>>
>> cheers,
>> Ole
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>



-- 
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email