Re: [savi] Consensus call on adopting draft-bi-savi-dhcp-00

[Frank Xia <xiayangsong at huawei.com>]

Hi Joel

Thank your comments.
Please see my response.

BR
Frank

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh at joelhalpern.com>
To: "Frank Xia" <xiayangsong at huawei.com>
Cc: "Christian Vogt" <christian.vogt at ericsson.com>; "SAVI Mailing List" 
<savi at ietf.org>; "Guang Yao" <yaoa02 at mails.tsinghua.edu.cn>
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: [savi] Consensus call on adopting draft-bi-savi-dhcp-00


> You make a good argument in your draft that we need to support SAVI 
> applied to prefixes delegated with DHCP to CPE rotuers.
Frank=>Thank you. This is a real deployment scenario for public
access network.

> If we do need to handle it, I would ask that we still have only one 
> document that describes DHCP handling.  This would include describing how 
> the SAVI devices knows which mode is applicable (either by configuration 
> or by sniffing, if that is effective.)
Frank=>It is a little bit difficult to fit these two into one document.
First of all, there are architctural difference. Secondly, if you look
into the details of Bi's document,  the whole state machine is not
applicable to the scenario we mention.  The reasons are CPE acting
as a router terminates all ARP/DAD messages, and DHCP messages
(RFC3315) are different from DHCP-PD (RFC3633).

> I think it would do the group a disservice, and confuse readers, if we had 
> two different DHCP documents for different cases.
Frank=>We can document the relationship between the two documents.
We can also try to keep these document consistent in style.

> Yours,
> Joel
>
> Frank Xia wrote:
> > Hi Christian
> >
> > I am fine with adopting this document as a WG draft.
> >
> > However, this draft,  imho, is limited when applying
> > for public access networks, especially broadband networks.
> >
> > I would like to ask WG to  consider to adopt
> > DHCP-PD based solution  as a compliment.
> > http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-kaippallimalil-savi-dhcp-pd-00.txt
> >
> > BR
> > Frank
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian Vogt" 
> > <christian.vogt at ericsson.com>
> > To: "SAVI Mailing List" <savi at ietf.org>
> > Cc: "Guang Yao" <yaoa02 at mails.tsinghua.edu.cn>
> > Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 4:44 AM
> > Subject: [savi] Consensus call on adopting draft-bi-savi-dhcp-00
> >
> >
> > Folks -
> >
> > During the SAVI working group meeting today, we made a consensus check
> > about adopting Internet draft "draft-bi-savi-dhcp-00" as a working group
> > document, showing a clear majority of attendees in favor.  I would now
> > like to initiate a confirming consensus call here on the mailing list.
> >
> > Please answer the following question with either "yes" or "no":
> >
> >   Should the SAVI working group adopt Internet draft
> >   "draft-bi-savi-dhcp-00" as a starting point for the SAVI protocol
> >   specification for DHCP-assigned IP addresses?
> >
> > Please respond before Friday, November 20.  I am attaching Internet
> > draft "draft-bi-savi-dhcp-00" for your convenience.
> >
> > - Christian
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > savi mailing list
> > > savi at ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savi
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > savi mailing list
> > savi at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savi