Subject: [dhcwg] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-06.txt

From: tianxiang li <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 14:17:55 +0800

Hi all,

We've updated a new version of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue
(version 06) according to the comments received during IESG Last Call. Main
changes include:

1. Changed text at the end of the first and second paragraph of the
“Solution” part of section 3.2.

OLD: If the server does not have a prefix with length matching the
prefix-length hint value, then the server SHOULD provide the prefix with
the shortest length possible which is closest to the prefix-length hint
value.

NEW: If the server does not have a prefix with length matching the
prefix-length hint value, then the server SHOULD provide the prefix whose
length is shorter and closest to the prefix-length hint value.

2. Added text at the last paragraph of the “Solution” part of section 3.2,
to describe what the server should do if it cannot provide any prefixes to
the client.

3. Changed option 4 of the “Solution” part of section 3.5:

OLD: Assign the original delegated prefix with 0 preferred-lifetime, a
short non-zero valid-lifetime...

NEW: Assign the original delegated prefix with 0 preferred-lifetime, a
specific non-zero valid-lifetime depending on actual requirement...

4. Added reference to RFC3315 in section 4 for security considerations in
DHCP

5. Added a sentence at the end of section 3.1 to explain that there is no
requirement for the order of the two IAPREFIX options.

6. Expanded the words “IAID” and “IA_PD” on first use in the second
paragraph of the “Problem” part of section 3.1:

IAID (Identity Association IDentifier)
IA_PD (Identity Association for Prefix Delegation)

7. Throughout the draft, changed “the prefix which length is” to “the
prefix whose length is”.

Thank you,
Tianxiang

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <[email-masked]>
Date: 2017-04-01 14:10 GMT+08:00
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-06.txt
To: Cong Liu <[email-masked]>, Yong Cui <[email-masked]>,
Tianxiang Li <[email-masked]>

A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-06.txt
has been successfully submitted by Tianxiang Li and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:           draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue
Revision:       06
Title:          DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues
Document date:  2017-03-31
Group:          dhc
Pages:          9
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-
prefix-length-hint-issue-06.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-
prefix-length-hint-issue/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-
length-hint-issue-06
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dhc-
dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-06
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-
prefix-length-hint-issue-06

Abstract:
   DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation (RFC3633) allows a client to include a
   prefix-length hint value in the IA_PD option to indicate a preference
   for the size of the prefix to be delegated, but is unclear about how
   the client and server should act in different situations involving
   the prefix-length hint.  This document provides a summary of the
   existing problems with the prefix-length hint and guidance on what
   the client and server could do in different situations.

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat