Dynamic Allocation of Shared IPv4 Addresses
draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-09
Yes
(Brian Haberman)
No Objection
(Alia Atlas)
(Barry Leiba)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Jari Arkko)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Spencer Dawkins)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 06 and is now closed.
Yes
(for -06)
Unknown
No Objection
(for -08)
Unknown
No Objection
(2015-05-28 for -08)
Unknown
The updated text in -08 addresses my concern.
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
No Objection
(2015-05-28 for -08)
Unknown
In section 10.1, how could preserving port randomization become "less" difficult?Presumably the assigned port range will never be larger than "all the ports". [Fixed in update]
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
No Objection
(2015-05-27 for -07)
Unknown
I have many of the same questions as Stephen, so I support his discuss and comments. In particular, I'd like to see text int he security considerations about sending traffic to the wrong host and how that is prevented as well as risks. Stephen hits on this in his comments and I'd like to see it addressed in the security considerations section. Since that's the point of the draft (multiple hosts using the same IPs), it is a major consideration.
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
No Objection
(2015-05-26)
Unknown
- section 2: s/mediums/media/? I also wondered if cable is considered shared here or not? (I assume Ethernet and WiFi are considered shared.) - What if 1 of N of the devices with that IP operates a server, how do we ensure that clients of that server talk to the right one? - I have some questions about ports. Can I ask for port 546 or 547? Why is that ever allowed? Would port 443 be very popular I wonder? Can I ask for other well known ports in the hopes of successful typosquatting sending me traffic? What if mptcp is used? - section 6, step 3: I'm not sure I get how there can be many DHCPOFFER messages from which to choose (in the nominal case). Are you envisaging that two DHCP relays/servers on the same subnet would be handing out different PSIDs? - section 6, step 6: Could I "release" ports that had not been assigned to me? Where's it say to watch out for that. - section 9: PSID-len - the description of that isn't clear to me sorry. I've not followed the references though so I assume it would be if I had. - section 10: [I-D.bajko-pripaddrassign] is odd - that was replaced by stuff that was replaced by stuff that was replaced by stuff that's still in-work in the dhc wg. I think you need to explain why you refer to the archaic thing and not the WG document.