> Hi Hideshi and all,
>
>
>
I am also wondering how the Interface-Id field should be used
> practically.
>
> RFC3315 is quite clear about how to use it for routing
> Relay-Reply messages back to the client. But the
rfc is
> evasive about how to use it in practice,
especially how to
> integrate it into the address
assignment process.
>
>
RFC3315 says servers can use the link-address field for
> identifying to which link the client is attached so as to
> assign a suitable ipv6 address. However when a
relay-forward
> message carries an Interface-Id
option, the link-address
> field is
undefined[1] but the server may still process it.
> The outcome is undefined and the rfc does not address this
issue.
>
> What do others
think about this ?
>
> Do
people here actually use the Interface-Id option ? if yes,
> which policy is used for assigning ipv6 addresses to the clients
?
And this would be the point. The DHCP RFCs are not intended to dictate policy. So other than suggesting that a DHCP server may use the Interface ID for address assignment policy, it is not up to the DHCP RFCs to say exactly how to do so.
Offhand, I'd envision some sort of mechanism where the DHCP server is configured with the IPv6 address or DUID of the relay, and the Interface IDs, and some list of prefixes associated with the DUID,IfID pair.
_______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg