Re: [dhcwg] DHCPv6 and DHCPv4 Vendor Message Drafts (Individual Submissions) / Agenda Time Request

[Richard Johnson <raj at cisco.com>]

I would like to speak up in support of both of these drafts and would  
like to ask where they currently stand.  They're both so straight- 
forward, I'm wondering if we can move them to WG Last Call soon, if  
they're not there already.

/raj


On Jul 16, 2008, at 3:25 PM, Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:

> Folks:
>
> I recently submitted an updated
> draft-volz-dhc-dhcpv6-vendor-message-01.txt and also a new
> draft-volz-dhc-dhcpv4-vendor-message-00.txt.
>
> The DHCPv6 draft was originally presented at the Prague IETF (IETF-68)
> and wasn't warmly received. One of the issues was the reserved option
> space, which has been removed. The more significant concern, if I  
> recall
> correctly, was that vendors would use these messages in place of going
> the standards route, and while I can't say that isn't a valid  
> concern, I
> suspect that in most cases that won't be an issue. My purpose for this
> message is to allow communication between DHCP entities for data that
> would not normally be standardized or there is little interest for.  
> For
> example, it could be used by DHCP servers to exchange configuration  
> data
> or implement failover (we know the long and tortured road that DHCPv4
> failover has followed and while there was a LOT of value to that work,
> we still don't have a standards track document and there's little
> interest to doing the work necessary to get it done).
>
> The DHCPv4 draft is new and was a natural extension. Of course, DHCPv4
> is a bit different from DHCPv6, so there are some differences (a new
> option is needed to convey the enterprise-id number).
>
> I will not be at the Dublin IETF and may try to participate virtually
> (it will be 4AM for me, but I likely shouldn't complain as most will
> still be jet lagged).
>
> I've asked Ralph (with his working co-chair hat off) to present
> something briefly. Hopefully he and John can work it into the schedule
> if time permits (it is a very late agenda addition).
>
> If anyone on the list supports the concept (as several folks did
> privately communicate interest to me), please speak up - either at the
> meeting or on the list.
>
> - Bernie
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg