IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Softwires] Why not use AFTR IPv6 address for the new DHCPv6 option?

"lizhenqiang" <lizhenqiang@chinamobile.com> Thu, 30 June 2011 10:55 UTC

Return-Path: <lizhenqiang@chinamobile.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 684C021F86E2 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 03:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.977
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, RELAY_IS_221=2.222]
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 2Evf-VTm3O-5 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 03:55:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (imss.chinamobile.com [221.130.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E97F21F864B for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 03:55:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CE00A6DC for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:54:54 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mail.chinamobile.com (unknown [10.1.28.22]) by imss.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833FEA6C8 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:54:54 +0800 (CST)
Received: from lizhengqiang ([10.2.2.206]) by mail.chinamobile.com (Lotus Domino Release 6.5.6) with ESMTP id 2011063018544308-18847 ; Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:54:43 +0800
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:54:38 +0800
From: lizhenqiang <lizhenqiang@chinamobile.com>
To: softwires@ietf.org
References: <mailman.129.1308942019.15733.softwires@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <201106301854385217804@chinamobile.com>
X-mailer: Foxmail 6, 9, 201, 16 [cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2011-06-30 18:54:43, Serialize by Router on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2011-06-30 18:54:54, Serialize complete at 2011-06-30 18:54:54
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====003_Dragon562262161636_====="
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.8231-6.8.0.1017-18230.005
X-TM-AS-Result: No--12.204-7.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--12.204-7.0-31-10;No--12.204-7.0-31-10
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No;No
X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No
Subject: [Softwires] Why not use AFTR IPv6 address for the new DHCPv6 option?
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:55:07 -0000

Hi All,

One question about the new DHCPv6 option for AFTR discovery. Maybe I missed the previous discussion. Sorry for that.
According to draft-ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option, a FQDN is suggested to be deliveried in the new DHCPv6 option to the B4. When receiving the FQDN, B4 has to do the DNS resolution to get the AFTR IPv6 address. The FQDN of the AFTR has to be configured in the DNS server. So, I think delivering the IPv6 address of the AFTR directly to the B4 is better. We can use DHCPv6 option to do this. The address of the AFTR only needs to be configured in the DHCPv6 server.

Best Regards,
Zhenqiang Li  
2011-06-30

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email