> MIF is going to discuss the confliction between RA and DHCP on tuesday
> afternoon MIF session (15:20-17:00)

This clashes with SOFTWIRE. Can you do it in the 17:10 session?

Regards
   Brian

On 2011-11-14 14:46, Hui Deng wrote:
> Hello 6MAN and DHCP,
> 
> Especially thanks *Wes Beebee*, Hemant Singh, Brian Carpenter, Alex and
> Ted's discussion.
> 
> MIF is going to discuss the confliction between RA and DHCP on tuesday
> afternoon MIF session (15:20-17:00)
> the author Tomasz has propose below resolution:
> 
> The problem is about potential conflict between RA and DHCP. Our
> proposed answer is as follows:
> 
> RA provides configuration to all hosts in a network. DHCP can provide
> configuration on a per host basis. Therefore it may be useful to use
> DHCP to "override" configuration for some hosts in a network (e.g.
> engineering department has extra routes defined for a lab network). As
> such, DHCP should be preferred.
> 
> However, there is also a matter of security. Both RA and DHCPv6 can be
> secured. If SEND is deployed, RA is more trustworthy than DHCP, so it
> should be preferred. Finally, there is such thing as secure DHCP, so if
> both RA and DHCP are secure, prefer SEND. I must admit that I never
> heard about any realistic deployments of secure DHCP, but it will change
> over time.
> 
> This approach can be summed as: favor secure, favor DHCP. Or to be more
> explicit, there's a complete list of all cases:
> a) RA vs DHCP => prefer DHCP
> b) RA(SEND) vs DHCP => prefer RA
> c) RA vs secure DHCP => prefer DHCP
> d) RA(SEND) vs secure DHCP => prefer DHCP
> 
> Does it sound reasonable?
> 
> This approach is very similar to what was described in DNS configuration
> over RA and DHCP (except the part about both RA and DHCP being secure
> that is not covered in RFC6106).
> 
> To summarize the discussion so far, Ted Lemon on MIF list agreed that
> DHCP should be preferred. Herman Singh on 6MAN list suggested to go look
> at what DNS over RA proposes and use the same approach. RFC6106, section
> 5.3.1covers cases a) and b). c) and d) are logical extension that takes
> DHCPv6 security into consideration. My understanding is that proposed
> solution will be satisfactory to everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to