Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-yourtchenko-ra-dhcpv6-comparison-00.txt (fwd)

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sun, 08 December 2013 19:22 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
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 878641AE08C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:22:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 o8Y7NzwvieXb for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:22:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pd0-x235.google.com (mail-pd0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 218C11AE08B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:22:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pd0-f181.google.com with SMTP id p10so3889769pdj.12 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 08 Dec 2013 11:22:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5WXsnQTiY4EIQ3S4LgH8qGBnyCm3xW1Ck3L9CLuBZRU=; b=d+iO36Mqql4TVCYf7h4t8Z7itXb88+aDVpk6FU3+ijoR+AHDD9wmG8urdIfCWh0RdB WmdhiUBRSPhBl15DQUpt/H2Ld0e4hb4xs0DuO5bD2vcBhf2cNom75OMHu1PDBpuecbFp uF6LuiAizypb6OV2FgxV/6y6dLRNfmhTsI+VQKI7bHn0xHJOgMug2qbY/YHiM9swJf4o x8kkHcvlj3WL3pn9ZP8snc4iUBObpFFy6r0CQLKNYyV3MmCScJNske66PglMgd54PpcA epYKfeMTD+8Sqpu/odS8SSIFkBPw7Z6f2fi8q6bX+NS/cakYg1SXMt3BEdpZYCqQUtLZ /7jA==
X-Received: by 10.68.59.202 with SMTP id b10mr16780630pbr.78.1386530560679; Sun, 08 Dec 2013 11:22:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] (27.198.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.198.27]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id sd3sm12595666pbb.42.2013.12.08.11.22.38 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 08 Dec 2013 11:22:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52A4C6FD.1080504@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 08:22:37 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
References: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1311271353550.3903@ayourtch-mac> <1386274786.29351.YahooMailNeo@web142501.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1312060759220.68814@ayourtch-mac> <1386378082.99914.YahooMailNeo@web161901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1312072028290.68814@ayourtch-mac> <F024FF5B-35A6-4221-952C-4A730A68C59D@delong.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1312080643090.68814@ayourtch-mac> <B561C767-677A-4A37-BA69-EB24951B2817@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <B561C767-677A-4A37-BA69-EB24951B2817@delong.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-yourtchenko-ra-dhcpv6-comparison-00.txt (fwd)
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: Sun, 08 Dec 2013 19:22:48 -0000

On 08/12/2013 19:40, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2013, at 22:25 , Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com> wrote:

...
>> I think you nailed it here: With RA you *discover* the routers available on the link, with DHCP in legacy IP, you *configure* them.
> 
> No, with DHCP, you discovered what some remote host rumored them to be.

I don't think we should be having this argument. We should be
trying to write down objectively the type of scenarios where
DHCPv6 is applicable, the type of scenarios where RA-only is
applicable, and the type of scenarios where both (simultaneously)
are applicable.

There's no right or wrong answer here.

   Brian