Subject: Re: DNSEXT WGLC: IPv6 Name Auto Registration

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 15:49:25 -0600

> Okay, then are you also assuming the DHCPv6 server assigns the IPv6
> address(es) of the client?  Or are you thinking of some registration
> mechanism from the client (that configures its address(es) in a
> stateless manner) to the server?

The way that was proposed in the DHC working group to solve this 
problem was to update the PTR record in the DNS on receipt of the DHCP 
Information Request packet.

I think the question of the client knowing its domain name is 
overstated - if it's going to update the DNS itself, it knows its 
domain name.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 19:46:56 -0500

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>>>> "jinmei" == jinmei  <Tatuya / ~~~~ <[email-masked]>> writes:
    >> I see two individual problems:

    >> 1. The device (according to the draft) has a problem knowing its FQDN.

    >> DHCP will happily supply that information.

    jinmei> Okay, then are you also assuming the DHCPv6 server assigns the
    jinmei> IPv6 address(es) of the client?  Or are you thinking of some
    jinmei> registration mechanism from the client (that configures its
    jinmei> address(es) in a stateless manner) to the server?

  I would think that the address of the DHCPv6 servers should simply
be returned by one (or all) of the routers in the router advertisements.
(As an option)

  As a fallback, the DHCPv6 server could have a well known link local
address. RS/RA gets you on the network. RFC2462 says:

   stateful autoconfiguration complement each other. For example, a host
   can use stateless autoconfiguration to configure its own addresses,
   but use stateful autoconfiguration to obtain other information.   
   Stateful autoconfiguration for IPv6 is the subject of future work
   [DHCPv6].

  The key thing to realize is that DHCP{v4} does not just do address
configuration - it establishes some level of trust between the end node and
the infrastructure. In particular, a random v6 node is just NOT going to have
any trust relationship with the DNS server such that it can update the
reverse map. A DHCP server can have that.

  The DHC WG is working on ways of making that trust stronger.
  SEND is also doing similar things. This is not a DNSext issue.

]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] [email-masked] http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [

---

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 20:19:17 +0900

>>>>> On Fri, 07 Feb 2003 19:46:56 -0500, 
>>>>> Michael Richardson <[email-masked]> said:

> be returned by one (or all) of the routers in the router advertisements.

...

Sorry, but you did not answer my question.  I didn't talk about the
address of the DHCPv6 server(s) at all.  I asked if you cared about a
host using stateless autoconfiguration to assign its own addresses in
your scenario.

BTW: (though this is not related to my question) your thought above is
incorrect.

> reverse map. A DHCP server can have that.

I know that.  This is not related to my question.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]