Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Draft for Re-chartering - COMMENTS NEEDED!!

From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:36:39 +0000

Hi:

Before we can proceed to re-charter, our AD (Suresh), would like to see some "discussion" (either in favor or not) of these changes.

Therefore, please send a comment to the list as to whether you are OK with the proposed re-charter text or whether you would prefer to see some changes made to it.

Thanks much!

-          Tomek and Bernie

From: dhcwg [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Bernie Volz (volz)
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2018 9:04 PM
To: Tomek Mrugalski <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Draft for Re-chartering

So, how about we go with:

The Dynamic Host Configuration Working Group (DHC WG) has developed DHCP
for automated allocation, configuration and management of IP addresses,
IPv6 prefixes, IP protocol stack and other parameters. DHCPv4 is
currently a Draft Standard and is documented in RFC 2131 and RFC 2132.
DHCPv6 is currently a Proposed Standard and is being updated and the WG
plans to advance the protocol to full standard.

The DHC WG is responsible for defining DHCP protocol extensions.
Definitions of new DHCP options that are delivered using standard
mechanisms with documented semantics are not considered a protocol
extension and thus are generally outside of scope for the DHC WG. Such
options should be defined within their respective WGs and reviewed by
DHCP experts in the Internet Area Directorate. However, if such options
require protocol extensions or new semantics, the protocol extension
work must be done in the DHC WG. Or, when no respective WG exists, the
DHC WG may take on the option definitions work with approval from the
responsible Area Director.

The DHC WG has the following main objectives:

1. Develop documents that are related to operational considerations of
DHCP for the wider community if and as needed.

2. Assist other WGs and independent submissions in defining options
(that follow RFC 7227 guidelines) and to assure DHCP operational
considerations are properly documented.

3. Additional topics and any option definition work may only be added
with approval from the responsible Area Director or by re-chartering.

4. Issue an updated version of the DHCPv6 base specification, and after
an appropriate interval following publication, advance to full standard.

This includes all of Tomek's proposed changes EXCEPT for adding anything to (2) for "external organizations". I think if asked we would (either personally or as a WG) help out. But I think that this needs to be formalized and will likely end up confusing people as to what it means.

-          Bernie