IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] [dhcwg] some feedback on http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration-01

Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com> Mon, 19 November 2012 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
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 3E58321F862B; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 22:59:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, 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 QpZIVoHEWqxP; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 22:59:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3434D21F8706; Sun, 18 Nov 2012 22:59:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AMX68527; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 06:59:18 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 06:58:55 +0000
Received: from SZXEML419-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.158) by lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 06:59:17 +0000
Received: from szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.6]) by szxeml419-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.158]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:59:09 +0800
From: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] [v6ops] some feedback on http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration-01
Thread-Index: AQHNxgP73Bu344hO/0adTOoIrKqbXZfwuOHA
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 06:59:08 +0000
Message-ID: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F8EE40@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <50A33EFA.7070008@bogus.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F8E40C@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <50A59C1F.2040407@bogus.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F8E520@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <50A5BB8E.6010308@bogus.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F8E5CB@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <1353047488.86944.YahooMailNeo@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630747408741@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9239F8ED16@szxeml545-mbx.china.huawei.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63074740B8A9@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63074740B8A9@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.111.98.140]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [dhcwg] some feedback on http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration-01
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 06:59:23 -0000

>> For me, router-based addr registration may need another dedicated draft.
>>Although current IA can work out, a new DHCP option that support bulk addr
>>registration may be more efficient than one addr per time. What's your
>>opinion?
>
>I think that bulk registration won't work because hosts aren't discovered all at
>the same time; either the router waits until it's accumulated enough to fill a
>packet, or it sends an update each time it discovers a new one.

Make sense. So, we will expand the current addr registration to be client-based model, in which the client maybe router.

Sheng

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email