Re: [mif] New Charter Items

Jouni Korhonen <> Wed, 02 March 2016 23:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E181B3529 for <>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:42:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pr8b8Ao1JzM0 for <>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:42:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D16231B3528 for <>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:42:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id fy10so2891708pac.1 for <>; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 15:42:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TmqBPRdwN/PUkEGaT3cxwJ2YsGoxMdBVBsiW4Qnelh0=; b=icwrp7wmM2L8bakG9cer/p/9qpHOSdcY5UFLR1JIIRfzQgNuebttOrQyYQHuNnJi3z mB/8OSqwpya9es+G2LbCyjfmrzg69GUve48Y8lAPDaYhmO/wvL++VemccA2lPRNNP6bZ 3soRS43Q3Q9jFVN/dbzztx7Vw1j9NhM/znlRwPYjZ6uh1R4Zg6EshYT4uWT68LBIpwDV G7UIS7RpV23+Y8uBWzCER6G6CJAM8x+meCORIMEL1MFG1XfQfkndT8u1/UQrLpp1ORu3 fqaCFi9yCF+IfLSUMlKAcAZEHvQbCEnULvlQ4AUiq0iydevx4Qkkadqd8lO7qM/hGrAQ yiUw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TmqBPRdwN/PUkEGaT3cxwJ2YsGoxMdBVBsiW4Qnelh0=; b=VsyUKrLncqwa3w+1CxTiw3o8pp4PZuLQW4sRbvFVf9g7dbLCKx/pYUsHn6kcYQ5/8P gFCm48QVXGvwF7JnHk43xJLzfWZvYeuVFDUYcttqxdzohWfq/+4Fu6edhfGDm4aPd9O4 6xca1rNRJnlvMFmyw1N7wWmx44wwsbGYwo0wMOkkqq5bUC6tUtKU2dTZQaofoPUOj17z Ka0KTe2r3MCUO045OvYpS+oxZgrBixBDiqD9q40DnkMv9DYCnDHn39WvLiG4VhdlDLp/ 6GxB9aDS/NXSgo5jlyx2+GjWaPJQ43YlsjrliPiuH27iaX9jfCItiF/XCqs6lCX25DIb CEaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKmushL3eis9SgbE5wo6jz+OqBAtqrEyq8Y7jt3TXDN1r9GS++WvX4YOrN74KUTXw==
X-Received: by with SMTP id fp4mr42591870pac.47.1456962133454; Wed, 02 Mar 2016 15:42:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id p9sm55468779pfa.11.2016. (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 02 Mar 2016 15:42:12 -0800 (PST)
To: Margaret Cullen <>, " List" <>
References: <>
From: Jouni Korhonen <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:42:12 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [mif] New Charter Items
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 23:42:15 -0000

Got questions & observations here..

3/2/2016, 4:24 AM, Margaret Cullen kirjoitti:
> At the last IETF meeting, and later on the mailing list, we reached consensus that we would use a two-step approach for the configuration of explicit PVDs.  RAs would be used to provide the information to do a second-step look up, including the PVD name.  Then a second step would be used to look up further information about the PVD.
> The only proposal we currently have on the table for a second-step look-up is a DNS look-up, and no one seems to proposing any other second step, so I believe there are three things that we need to define in order for this to work:
> - An NTP server option for RAs, so that DNSSEC can be used for the lookup.
> - A PVD Name option for RAs, so that we can tell hosts what PVD to look up.

I thought we already got a WG I-D that is able to carry required name 
information if needed - maybe not in the "format" at the moment folks 
want it to be but it is up to WG to steer the content, right?

> - What PVD information can be stored in the DNS and how it will be retrieved.

While DNS is a good thing and actually a good idea in the context we are 
discussing here, few things to think in addition to those already found 
in the meeting minutes: does not quite work if DNS is not there and 
going to DNS all time even for the simplies form of PVD configuration 
seems a bit unefficient. These are not really concern of homenet type 
setups but maybe for other deployments where links come and go.

My 0.02ZWD,

> Those things would need to be added to our charter, so that we can accept corresponding work items.
> Does anyone have any objection to adding these three things to the MIF charter?  If not, the chairs and the AD will put together a propos
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list