IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Interaction Operational Guidance-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-guidance

Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no> Thu, 09 January 2014 08:10 UTC

Return-Path: <tore@fud.no>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF2D91AE06F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:10:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.438
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.438 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538] autolearn=ham
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 DqREXanpc4X0 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:10:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from greed.fud.no (greed.fud.no [IPv6:2a02:c0:1001:100::145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDECD1AE181 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:10:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [2a02:c0:2:1:1194:6:0:1002] (port=43935 helo=echo.linpro.no) by greed.fud.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tore@fud.no>) id 1W1AhD-0004Rt-AJ; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 09:10:31 +0100
Message-ID: <52CE5977.4030107@fud.no>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 09:10:31 +0100
From: Tore Anderson <tore@fud.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
References: <201312251345.rBPDj1u26004@ftpeng-update.cisco.com> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D827CF1@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAKD1Yr1i56skSnw+MzuYWsf97MwCfavgu2ADm5PyQBQSq4u+KA@mail.gmail.com> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D8283E7@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAKD1Yr0RgsL5sF-p_yNKEtCuXC-cTxO3MAZU9fzPFGoACXuRkA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401090702210.20074@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAKD1Yr2kxL_TcTXshAu-US4ZHuKhpYza95PK6m=5PJ2juYDT_A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401090758240.20074@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401090758240.20074@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: draft-liu-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-guidance@tools.ietf.org, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Interaction Operational Guidance-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-guidance
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 08:10:47 -0000

* Mikael Abrahamsson

> Prefix Information Option with O=1

This should be L=1 (cf. RFC 4861 section 4.6.2).

The O flag means something completely different, and is in any case not
part of the Prefix Information (definition in RFC 4861 section 4.2).

Other than that I agree with your text. Perhaps the "containing
default-route" could be elaborated on a little bit, though. It might not
be obvious to everyone that an RA doesn't "contain" a default route
option in the same way it does Prefix/Route Information Option.

For example: «Routing can be implemented on hosts by means of accepting
and implementing information from RA messages containing default-route
(i.e., RAs whose Router Lifetime field is nonzero), [...]»

Tore

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email