Re: [RTG-DIR] DHCPv6 Prefix Pool Option

Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com> Fri, 17 August 2012 12:38 UTC

Return-Path: <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A05021F8517; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 05:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.535
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XSV-EmdpCgUH; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 05:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imr4.ericy.com (imr4.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4CAC21F847D; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 05:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) by imr4.ericy.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id q7HCdHcX008074; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 07:39:20 -0500
Received: from EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.190]) by eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.181]) with mapi; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 08:38:39 -0400
From: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 08:38:37 -0400
Thread-Topic: [RTG-DIR] DHCPv6 Prefix Pool Option
Thread-Index: Ac18dTlosVjgMFX8TvGBHSS6Kcn3QA==
Message-ID: <8E54F935-4870-44DC-B048-6267A41FECEE@ericsson.com>
References: <DBEF94A4-5D49-4EA3-BACC-2B53EAACD271@nominum.com> <019101cd70e5$c949c890$5bdd59b0$@olddog.co.uk> <3C8E8056-D034-453E-98F6-A028DE304286@ericsson.com> <CD6B8E27-A50D-4C4D-ABB0-753141351A12@fugue.com> <AFCDE0DD-3885-43A3-A883-D44DE2B29BDA@ericsson.com> <3E00A188-D7F9-44AD-A9A7-DF49BE6484AF@fugue.com> <E1CE3E6E6D4E1C438B0ADC9FFFA345EA3C452A99@SZXEML510-MBS.china.huawei.com> <6C2CDBAF-3F66-4B83-8697-2B073967B166@fugue.com>
In-Reply-To: <6C2CDBAF-3F66-4B83-8697-2B073967B166@fugue.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-10--319786046"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Leaf yeh <leaf.y.yeh@huawei.com>, "rtg-dir@ietf.org" <rtg-dir@ietf.org>, "dhc-chairs@tools.ietf.org Chairs" <dhc-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "<dhc-ads@tools.ietf.org>" <dhc-ads@tools.ietf.org>, "routing-discussion@ietf.org" <routing-discussion@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [RTG-DIR] DHCPv6 Prefix Pool Option
X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Directorate <rtg-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg-dir>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dir>, <mailto:rtg-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 12:38:50 -0000

Hi Ted, 
I've been on vacation. I guess I see this as a case of the tail wagging the dog with the BNG getting routing aggregation policy from the DHCPv6 server. However, I'm certainly not going to let my opinion as a routing chair and developer of a leading BNG platform hold up the will of an entire working group. The "Security  Considerations" section does need to be beefed up as this does increase the exposure - just imagine a subverted DHCPv6 responding with 0::/0.
Thanks,
Acee 
On Aug 10, 2012, at 8:50 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:

> So, I haven't heard any discussion on this topic since I wrote a clarifying message on August 6 about the intended use case for this option.   Does this mean that we've satisfactorily addressed the use case question that Acee raised, and that no-one else objects, or does it mean that everybody is taking a well-deserved break from IETF email following the Vancouver meeting?
>