Hi Jim:

What does it mean that "KAME owns the BSD stack for the
entire industry" ? I thought that KAME was a project on IPv6,
and therefore they can develope what they want, it's up to the
BSD community of users/developers to build what they think that
could be useful for others. I mean, if KAME don't want to implement
something, we can't make anything => (somebody else will have to
implement it....right ?)


On Thursday 09 January 2003 15:44, Bound, Jim wrote:
> Dear Jinmei,
>
> How are you and I hope well.  I was forwarded this email thread below.  If
> KAME is not doing DHCPv6 I think that is a significant mistake for this
> code base.  Plus if the M bit or O bit is set it is required to go look for
> stateful server.  KAME view is simply 100% wrong that stateful is not
> required and the wrong view.  I have copied Jun Murai and Latif Ladid too
> and my co-author Ralph Droms at Cisco and others from the mail below. KAME
> owns the BSD stack for the entire industry.  If KAME keeps this view I will
> raise it to the highest levels worldwide as a very serious issue and a very
> intense battle will begin yet again over the ownership of the BSD code
> base.  It might be we need another forum to own the BSD code base.  Please
> reconsider this position at KAME.  I will note there are implementations
> for DHCPv6 for Linux. THis is not the first time KAME DID NOT speak with
> the rest of the developers in the worldwide Internet Development Community.
>  BSD is not KAMEs private code base it is a public domain code base.  Also
> KAME should not prevent developers from developing DHCPv6 on the BSD and
> then KAME incorporating it back into the code base.
>
> P.S.  Jun and Latif - THis is very serious issue that must be fixed and the
> view that is expressed below.  It also could point to the lack of
> engineering design by KAME for IPv6.
>
> Thanks
> /jim
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 1:31 PM
> To: Juan Rodriguez Hervella
> Cc: Wolff; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: DHCPv6
>
> >>>>> On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 12:20:03 +0100,
> >>>>> Juan Rodriguez Hervella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >> However, you may have to note that the implementation does NOT support
> >> stateful address autoconfiguration via DHCPv6, NOR WILL.
> >
> > I don't know a lot about DHCPv6, but...why not ?
>
> Because we don't need it.
> See the BUGS section of
> http://orange.kame.net/dev/cvsweb2.cgi/kame/kame/kame/dhcp6/dhcp6c.8?rev=1.
>18&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup JINMEI, Tatuya
> Communication Platform Lab.
> Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The IPv6 Users Mailing List
> Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe users" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 1:30 PM
> To: Bartek Gajda
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: DHCPv6
>
> >>>>> On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 10:24:13 +0100,
> >>>>> Bartek Gajda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>>
> >>> The best is HP-UX, rest of them do not implement prefix delegation.
> >>
> >> Perhaps you meant stateful address allocation (not prefix
> >> delegation). KAME does implement prefix delegation (PD). Actually,
> >> PD is our primary motivation to implement DHCPv6.
> >
> > Yes, you are right, but...
> > We tested all these DHCPv6 implementation and KAME does implemet prefix
> > delegation, but prefix is not assigned to interface on client side. Also
>
> KAME's client should be able to assign an address and a prefix derived
> from the site prefix delegated by PD to a client's LAN interface. I
> guess you problem should be due to a lack of some configuration
> parameters.
>
> > client does not use DHCPv6 information (like DNS server address) in
> > system configuration. - this is the result of our tests. :-(
>
> You're correct on this point, though you did not mention the case of
> DNS addresses in your first message. We could just rewrite
> /etc/resolve.conf using the advertised DNS address (like ISC's
> dhclient), but we don't like this type of modification. Thus, we
> currently only logs the addresses.
>
> > Besides KAME implements draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-26 and the final
> > specification of DHCPv6 is based on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-28.txt
> > Do you have any information when and what will be implemented in KAME
> > DHCPv6? We will test new relase with pleasure.
> > All I said concerns kame-20021118-freebsd47-snap.tgz
>
> As I said in a separate message in this ML, our latest implementation
> is based on the latest draft. It is available in this week's snapshot.
> However, the snapshot version had memory leakage, which was already
> fixed in the repository. The latest repository version is thus
> recommended instead of the snap. Also, we'll do more tests on the
> implementation in the week of Jan. 20. If you're just want to try it
> and is not in a hurry, I'd rather recommend to wait until Jan 27's
> snap.
> JINMEI, Tatuya
> Communication Platform Lab.
> Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The IPv6 Users Mailing List
> Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe users" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Juan Rodriguez Hervella [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:20 PM
> To: JINMEI Tatuya / ????; Wolff
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: DHCPv6
>
> On Thursday 09 January 2003 09:25, JINMEI Tatuya / _セBニ wrote:
> > >>>>> On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 02:33:32 -0300,
> > >>>>> "Wolff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > > is there any implementation of DHCPv6 for FreeBSD?
> > > thank you,
> > > Martin.
> >
> > The KAME project provides an implementation based on
> > draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-28.txt. Please check it at
> >
> > http://www.kame.net/
> > http://orange.kame.net/dev/cvsweb2.cgi/kame/kame/kame/dhcp6/
> >
> > However, you may have to note that the implementation does NOT support
> > stateful address autoconfiguration via DHCPv6, NOR WILL.
>
> Hi:
> I don't know a lot about DHCPv6, but...why not ?

-- 
JFRH
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The IPv6 Users Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe users" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to