Subject: [dhcwg] FW: [v6ops] socializing new DHCPV6 req in the IETF IPV6 CE rtr bis doc

From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 12:33:30 -0500

FYI

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Hemant Singh (shemant)
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 1:23 PM
To: Ted Lemon
Cc: IPv6 Operations
Subject: [v6ops] socializing new DHCPV6 req in the IETF IPV6 CE rtr bis
doc

Hi Ted,

In the latest version of the document which is

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis/?in
clude_text=1

Please note this new section which is something we'd like to socialize
with the DHC folks.   The idea is since DHC tries forever, if a client
send the first SOLiCIT with say, two options, such as the IA_NA and the
IA_PD options,  then if the server replied to the first SOLICIT having
served only a IA_NA IA_Address and error for the IA_PD (due to server
mis-configuration), then if the client sends a SOLICIT at another time,
the client should not just include the IA_PD but  send both the options
as in the first SOLiCIT.   The reason is what if the server has changed
provisioning for the IA_NA in the meantime. 

5.7.  Additional DHCPv6 WAN Requirement

   When the WAN interface sends a DHCPV6 SOLICIT message, the CE router

   SHOULD request all mandatory information (IA_NA and IA_PD options) in

   the SOLICIT regardless of whether any partial information was

   received in response to previous SOLICITs.

Thanks,

Hemant

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 17:40:37 +0000

On Jul 26, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
Please note this new section which is something we’d like to socialize with the DHC folks.   The idea is since DHC tries forever, if a client send the first SOLiCIT with say, two options, such as the IA_NA and the IA_PD options,  then if the server replied to the first SOLICIT having served only a IA_NA IA_Address and error for the IA_PD (due to server mis-configuration), then if the client sends a SOLICIT at another time, the client should not just include the IA_PD but  send both the options as in the first SOLiCIT.   The reason is what if the server has changed provisioning for the IA_NA in the meantime.

Why are Reconfigure and regular old lease timeout not sufficient in this case?