Re: [renum] SLAAC/DHCPv6 addr-conf operational gaps

Hi, Victor & Arturo

Thanks for the comments.
We do plan to write a draft of subsequence solution. But as Victor said, step 1 is to see if the groups agree there are problems. So hope more people could feed back on this.

Many thanks.

B.R.
Bing

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Victor Kuarsingh [mailto:victor.kuarsingh@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 9:28 PM
> To: Liubing (Leo); ipv6@ietf.org; v6ops@ietf.org
> Cc: renum@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: SLAAC/DHCPv6 addr-conf operational gaps
> 
> Bing,
> 
> I as able to review the draft and agree this needs to be documented and
> discussed.  I have had many frustrating nights dealing with my multiple
> OSs at home and figuring out what behaviour I was trying to expect when
> changing the upstream router's settings (M/O/A).
> 
> I think the problem space discussion within the draft should be enough to
> have a preliminary discussion in the WG.  I know there have been issues in
> the past with various opinions on what the M/O bits (for example) should
> or should not be used for - or how authoritative they should be.
> 
> If the groups can agree that there is in fact a problem, then I would
> agree with Arturo that we can have a constructive follow-up
> draft/discussion on the corrective action.
> 
> Lets get past step 1 and agree there is an issue (or not); then go down
> the more sensitive path of agreeing to the corrective action.
> 
> Thanks for putting this together.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Victor Kuarsingh
> 
> 
> 
> On 2013-02-26 2:14 AM, "Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> >Hi, 6man & v6ops
> >
> >We submitted a new draft to discuss the SLAAC/DHCPv6 interaction gaps.
> >
> >As we know there are several flags in RA messages regarding with the host
> >configuration behavior, which are A (Autonomous) flag, M (Managed) flag,
> >and O (Otherconfig) flag.
> >For some reason, the host behavior of interpreting the flags is ambiguous
> >in the standard (mainly RFC4862). I presented a draft discussing M flag
> >behavior in 6man @ietf84, and there were some feedbacks arguing the
> same
> >issue. This draft analyzed all the three flags, and provided test result
> >of current implementations, it showed the behavior of different
> >mainstream desktop OSes have varied. The ambiguous and variation might
> >cause operational problems, such as renumbering (used to discuss in
> >6renum WG and been documented in the WG drafts), cold start problem,
> and
> >management gaps .etc.
> >
> >Your review and comments would be appreciated very much.
> >
> >All the best,
> >Bing
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
> >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 5:52 PM
> >> To: Liubing (Leo)
> >> Cc: rbonica@juniper.net
> >> Subject: New Version Notification for
> >> draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt
> >>
> >>
> >> A new version of I-D, draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01.txt
> >> has been successfully submitted by Bing Liu and posted to the
> >> IETF repository.
> >>
> >> Filename:	 draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
> >> Revision:	 01
> >> Title:		 DHCPv6/SLAAC Address Configuration Interaction Problem
> >> Statement
> >> Creation date:	 2013-02-25
> >> Group:		 Individual Submission
> >> Number of pages: 12
> >> URL:
> >>
> >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-proble
> m
> >>-
> >> 01.txt
> >> Status:
> >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
> >> Htmlized:
> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-01
> >> Diff:
> >>
> >>http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-0
> 1
> >>
> >> Abstract:
> >>    This document analyzes the host behavior of DHCPv6/SLAAC
> interaction
> >>    issue. It reviews the standard definition of the host behaviors and
> >>    provides the test results of current mainstream implementations.
> Some
> >>    potential operational gaps of the interaction are also described.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The IETF Secretariat
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >ipv6@ietf.org
> >Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 