IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Next step? [Re: The bottom is /112]

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Sat, 21 November 2020 09:43 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A8F43A0DC8; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 01:43:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 NwuyoDmtDWxj; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 01:43:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC8F13A0DC1; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 01:43:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.10.178] (dhcp21719716422.blix.com [217.197.164.22]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 75F7D4E11AED; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 09:43:07 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 10:43:03 +0100
Message-Id: <A2543FDA-BE6B-49CC-93E5-C620F1B03242@employees.org>
References: <CAD6AjGQCm4U06huxns6qGKPAa-MqbeaHpjZAhpBuv-S13xo44Q@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGQCm4U06huxns6qGKPAa-MqbeaHpjZAhpBuv-S13xo44Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18B92)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Y0U27CDsQ_-u1r9rrvTorjZEkYY>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Next step? [Re: The bottom is /112]
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 09:43:12 -0000


> On 21 Nov 2020, at 07:13, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> That said, my thinking has evolved.  And, i appreciate the living and illuminating discussion.   i don’t think i need standards work at  this point. I am i going to take a swing at making dhcpv6 work... not as specified in that long rfc, but just taking the view of a dhcpv6-pd packet as an api, which will simplify things. 

Exactly. It’s just a simple two packet exchange. You don’t need much of the machinery. You do need some sort of database. But you got that. 

Cheers 
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email