Re: [mif] New Charter Items

"Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <> Wed, 02 March 2016 23:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 734D51B355F for <>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:51:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.507
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2zdGM3eeNUCU for <>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:51:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEDFD1B355E for <>; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:51:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2468; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1456962715; x=1458172315; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=5BHCn6uS9S7c+E8n/1/qdhcyqSong1qNn/4jVi0Slq4=; b=evRB2klXPNx4u1qoBXqCrVMjGlqAjbLphdoealnmsP1HslzPKlmj39Of LbiS3n2OFJGSD07opw5pW/u4Lkv8xbh7IX0L9xA81SE4RDb7krU8ejU0E v+/HUf0lYESSsugIJRPy4qrf7PVitVPxpBLBvd+VkNN3oFMysLJZ6D4jj w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,531,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="243428026"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Mar 2016 23:51:55 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u22NpsdG021280 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 2 Mar 2016 23:51:55 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 17:51:54 -0600
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 17:51:53 -0600
From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <>
To: Jouni Korhonen <>
Thread-Topic: [mif] New Charter Items
Thread-Index: AQHRdH6KMsB4v/QegEWXN3aRhswPTZ9HNeEA//+eIFc=
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 23:51:53 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: " List" <>, Margaret Cullen <>
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 23:51:57 -0000


I missed the last meeting and looks like I missed this discussion and the conclusions around this new approach.

Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 3, 2016, at 5:12 AM, Jouni Korhonen <>; wrote:
> 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,
>    Jouni
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list