IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MEXT] draft-xia-mext-hioptv4-01 and draft-ietf-mip6-hiopt-17 comments

xiayangsong <xiayangsong@huawei.com> Mon, 21 March 2011 17:15 UTC

Return-Path: <xiayangsong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8C5A3A68BC for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zWqftMNX+X3J for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:15:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usaga04-in.huawei.com (usaga04-in.huawei.com [206.16.17.180]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F54D3A68B3 for <mext@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:15:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (usaga04-in [172.18.4.101]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LIF009SK4086G@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for mext@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:16:56 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.18.9.108]) by usaga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPS id <0LIF00915407ZJ@usaga04-in.huawei.com> for mext@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:16:56 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from DFWEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:16:56 -0700
Received: from DFWEML503-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.47]) by DFWEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:16:55 -0700
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:16:54 +0000
From: xiayangsong <xiayangsong@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <4D84DC78.4070108@gmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.193.34.151]
To: Tomasz Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
Message-id: <CB60645E6241144CB82269604373757AE6DE68@dfweml503-mbx.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-language: en-US
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Accept-Language: en-US
Thread-topic: [MEXT] draft-xia-mext-hioptv4-01 and draft-ietf-mip6-hiopt-17 comments
Thread-index: AQHL5lRvOix09ntpbEWDfitJ9O/U6JQ4CNEg
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
References: <4D8283DF.7030702@gmail.com> <CB60645E6241144CB82269604373757AE6D72F@dfweml503-mbx.china.huawei.com> <4D84DC78.4070108@gmail.com>
Cc: Behcet Sarikaya <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com>, MEXT WG <mext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [MEXT] draft-xia-mext-hioptv4-01 and draft-ietf-mip6-hiopt-17 comments
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:15:25 -0000

Hi Tomek

Thank your response. 
Please check my comments inline.

BR
Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Tomasz Mrugalski [mailto:tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 9:40 AM
To: xiayangsong
Cc: MEXT WG; Behcet Sarikaya
Subject: Re: [MEXT] draft-xia-mext-hioptv4-01 and draft-ietf-mip6-hiopt-17 comments

On 2011-03-18 00:13, xiayangsong wrote:
> Please see my inline comments...
> 
> BR
> Frank

> I think Ted's major objection was Section 4.2, where DSMIPv6 Relay
> Agent Option is defined. Why do you need this option for? What options
> is it supposed to carry? Are you expecting it to convey DHCPv6 options,
> as defined in mip6-hiopt-17? That would be wrong on many levels. You
> would encapsulate DHCPv6 suboptions into DHCPv4 options. DHCPv4 clients
> typically don't have parsing capabilities of DHCPv6 option formats.
> Frank=>Just I explained aforementioned, we need define DHCPv4 option for
> carrying home agents information(such as IPv6 addresses). We can't encapsulate
> DHCPv6 suboptions into DHCPv4 options because the client is DHCPv4 only.
Agree. I maybe didn't express myself clearly. DHCPv6 options must not be
encapsulated in DHCPv4 options.
Frank=>Agree.

Maybe I misunderstood the intent of the authors, so let me explain how I
read the draft: draft-xia-mext-hioptv4-01, section 4.2 defines DSMIPv6
Relay Agent Option (a DHCPv4 Option) that contains sub-options field.
Its content is defined as "A series of sub-options as specified in
I-D.ietf-mip6-hiopt". ietf-mip6-hiopt-17 defines couple DHCPv6 options.
I'm not sure how can this be interpreted otherwise than an attempt to
encapsulate DHCPv6 suboptions within DHCPv4 option.
Frank=>Sorry for the confusion we introduced. Actually, we related our
draft to ietf-mip6-hiopt-17 just because they have similar scenarios.
Our draft was supposed to define an independent set of DHCPv4 options.

> At current form, this draft is unclear at best. Who is including
> OPTION_DSMIP6_RELAY option? Relay?
> Frank=>Access routers as DHCP relay and DHCPv4 servers includes the option.
I think this should be clarified in the draft.
Frank=>We will add this.

Hope that helps,
Tomek

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email