[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Cc: dnsop@cafax.se
From: Bob Hinden <hinden@iprg.nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:00:47 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20030926064336.01e841a0@flask.cisco.com>
Sender: owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject: Re: draft vienna minutes (sorry about the delay)

Hi Ralph,

At 03:54 AM 9/26/2003, Ralph Droms wrote:
>I would agree with "reasonably fair" - in a little more detail, I
>heard a louder hum for DHCPv6 but not rough consensus.  I think the
>minutes might provide a little more detail about my presentation (for those
>who don't go look up the presentation); perhaps "configuring devices for DNS
>using DHCPv6"?  Finally, for those who weren't present, I think the minutes
>should note that DHCPv6 has been accepted as a Proposed Standard and is
>published as RFC 3315 (I believe this was the case as of the Vienna
>meeting), so we're comparing the use of a published standard against the
>development and future publication of a new protocol.

If I remember correctly you said that the RFC was in authors 48hours review 
at the time and wasn't quite published by the meeting.  :-)  It certainly 
is published now!

I am in agreement except for the point about the development of a new 
protocol.  One of the current alternate proposals is for a new option for 
Router Advertisements so no new protocol would need to be developed in that 
case.  The well known address approach doesn't require any protocol.  I 
agree that both of these require specifications to be completed, approved, 
and published.

I have been wondering if it would make sense to define a new RA option 
designed to carry DHCPv6 options.  That would make it possible to take 
advantage of DHCPv6 options that would make sense to use in RAs.  I think 
this would be useful for information that would be common to all hosts on 
the link.

The biggest technical difference I see between the DHCPv6 (and DHCPv6 lite) 
and RA approaches is that DHCPv6 is a two packet exchange for each host vs. 
the RA approach where a RA message can be multicast to all hosts on the link.

>According to the minutes, the first step was to be a continuation of the
>discussion on the mailing list.  Perhaps the chairs could frame and kick off
>that discussion before we go to a design team?

Good point.

Bob

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.

Home | Date list | Subject list