Re: [tcpm] Provisioning 0-RTT Converters (draft-boucadair-tcpm-dhc-converter)

"Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com> Wed, 24 April 2019 05:41 UTC

Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F15901200CD for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 22:41:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=hRDI+yyl; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=VqlDauZB
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GsKkIOEK4uyQ for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 22:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A81712002E for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Apr 2019 22:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12874; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1556084509; x=1557294109; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=fPdHpfKoiLaunLsfvo2PBCD9d3b+KpocejRIJViXxGk=; b=hRDI+yyljBNVKDc/0Vceprsu31aDe2AjdNGtaQq9Ws584NRyQZ5MBZU0 TzVn/MhcmyLcsmppfcglIr7LeEZwQdyXjBcDm6iO1xP70Z7qxpiV1j5jS 6d1dklgbs5Jq+/hdk1op/QBNwYaCFo1P0JOYFQEIuQ8bsZPOkK8DbYg0N E=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AKaZs/BxKPe8/S8rXCy+N+z0EezQntrPoPwUc9p?= =?us-ascii?q?sgjfdUf7+++4j5YhWN/u1j2VnOW4iTq+lJjebbqejBYSQB+t7A1RJKa5lQT1?= =?us-ascii?q?kAgMQSkRYnBZueBlD9IPf0YgQxHd9JUxlu+HToeUU=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BuAABv9r9c/49dJa1mHAEBAQQBAQc?= =?us-ascii?q?EAQGBUQcBAQsBgQ4vJCwDaFUgBAsoCodMA4RSikUcgjuPVIJ6A4JUgXiBLhS?= =?us-ascii?q?BZw4BASMKhEAChiwjNAkOAQMBAQQBAQIBAm0cDIVKAQYtEwEBNwERAQgRAwE?= =?us-ascii?q?CKDkUCQoEAQ0FgyOBHUwDHAECDJ08AooUgiCCeQEBBYFGQYMCGIINAwaBMgG?= =?us-ascii?q?LSReBQD+BEYMSPoJhAgMBgSVGEg0JhSuRcJRqCQKCCIYPhiSFdxuVFIwEhj2?= =?us-ascii?q?NfgIEAgQFAg4BAQWBTziBVnAVgyeCD4NvhRSFP3KBKY4oAYEgAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,388,1549929600"; d="scan'208,217";a="267293586"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 24 Apr 2019 05:41:47 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-016.cisco.com (xch-rcd-016.cisco.com [173.37.102.26]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x3O5fl5o002448 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 05:41:47 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-016.cisco.com (173.37.102.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:41:46 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:41:46 -0500
Received: from NAM05-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 00:41:46 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=JKjnK8WLLCHzQ+4nu9sjaep4bytuZJL4bhwgB80rkDw=; b=VqlDauZB3SMebBOoDu5XpGjV8YBMF5dPJFsnjwRTu9gTFzz65BOay1F27OWmbh3Y6HxW2MQT/cahzFUX8qXYsNU/1MV1z998AvxXbN9DuB63o3lP5pqyXX+H1Hp9YaZsNP5uCcO28KHSCyB7z6O0id8+CplVy3U9iCqmSctTqpE=
Received: from DM6PR11MB3563.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.229.161) by DM6PR11MB3626.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.230.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1835.12; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 05:41:45 +0000
Received: from DM6PR11MB3563.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::745a:5d42:ba2a:5d8d]) by DM6PR11MB3563.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::745a:5d42:ba2a:5d8d%2]) with mapi id 15.20.1835.010; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 05:41:45 +0000
From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
CC: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy (TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com)" <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com>, JACQUENET Christian TGI/OLN <christian.jacquenet@orange.com>
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] Provisioning 0-RTT Converters (draft-boucadair-tcpm-dhc-converter)
Thread-Index: AQHU+mBm379i5uZs+UuHjtUEsAtaPw==
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 05:41:45 +0000
Message-ID: <D8E5435A.2F3E5F%sgundave@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.7.170905
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=sgundave@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [128.107.241.164]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8c3272d1-ae47-4838-3233-08d6c877897a
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:DM6PR11MB3626;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR11MB3626:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 37
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR11MB36260FF7B43626E0A4C6FB20D93C0@DM6PR11MB3626.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 00179089FD
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39860400002)(396003)(376002)(136003)(346002)(366004)(199004)(189003)(26005)(68736007)(966005)(2906002)(14454004)(478600001)(476003)(71190400001)(606006)(2616005)(256004)(36756003)(71200400001)(102836004)(19273905006)(66446008)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(186003)(66946007)(53546011)(7736002)(86362001)(97736004)(91956017)(73956011)(76116006)(6436002)(25786009)(6506007)(2501003)(6512007)(3846002)(229853002)(236005)(53936002)(8936002)(790700001)(6486002)(53376002)(5660300002)(66066001)(110136005)(58126008)(54906003)(6116002)(6306002)(6246003)(54896002)(316002)(486006)(8676002)(81156014)(4326008)(99286004)(81166006); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR11MB3626; H:DM6PR11MB3563.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: tOSXU0VQ6ITrsuSpDhN+w3HtChrGcjl5qzGVyjuak7rbdC53kbA5ttYQMXt+HRqcXgnANrLR9TZk8uPmNfSloJWw/2ddbpa3iU1tKiwLWtclraEqp/Soj4vKsGtTJdMtjbeIKBydbYQ6xI3ArzxuV8I4PzdWlz14TnK14y068cFF1gWBYhcw3GalgFYiPoFlrYVd1iVKzCmkbnt+UJ7joFAI5jTU4TgLDlymIZ4jtd3A6OoeKRBfvh425BDF08Zwav6NZ54+wOgFEbX5NWVB8jEoexwaOKSu+u9V8CJzZZgyU10Hncf2XztAJ6EngCqA79hjwrp0JAilaQbewAHU/vZ3vC6KjqYiLtQI9JNsBsmhQfIVrfC+RhZ4obKiILGLTAnkdVe6e6ojr9WUUcZKfDoFmRCfs/pK7K76pizTvX0=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D8E5435A2F3E5Fsgundaveciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8c3272d1-ae47-4838-3233-08d6c877897a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 24 Apr 2019 05:41:45.2043 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB3626
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.26, xch-rcd-016.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-7.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/6r07tVcCPY6S-bPiccn87VLwnro>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Provisioning 0-RTT Converters (draft-boucadair-tcpm-dhc-converter)
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 05:41:52 -0000

Hi Med & WG:

I have reviewed the draft (draft-boucadair-tcpm-dhc-converter) and I think this is a useful option. Configuration of converter address on the endpoint, or for that matter, any configuration element is a pain. In that sense, any steps to eliminate this static configuration will help deployments and therefore I am supportive of this work. Also, FWIW, I was earlier exploring L2 signaling approaches for provisioning the same and I think DHCP option makes lot more sense.  I hope you will find support for this work.

Sri





From: tcpm <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>>
Date: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 7:05 AM
To: "tcpm@ietf.org<mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>" <tcpm@ietf.org<mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>>
Cc: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy (TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com<mailto:TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com>)" <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com<mailto:TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com>>, JACQUENET Christian TGI/OLN <christian.jacquenet@orange.com<mailto:christian.jacquenet@orange.com>>
Subject: [tcpm] Provisioning 0-RTT Converters (draft-boucadair-tcpm-dhc-converter)

Dear all,

Now that the 0-RTT Converter spec is about to be LCed, we would like to ask the WG to consider this draft
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-boucadair-tcpm-dhc-converter/ which is useful for the dynamic provisioning of the Converters to CPEs, in particular.

The converters discovery options cannot be defined in the dhc WG because its charter says the following:

“Definitions of new DHCP options that are delivered using standard
mechanisms with documented semantics are not considered a protocol
extension and thus are generally outside of scope for the DHC WG. Such
options should be defined within their respective WGs”

We hope that tcpm can host this work.

Cheers,
Med