Issues with multiple stateful DHCPv6 options
draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00

 
Document
Type Replaced Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2013-02-19 (latest revision 2012-03-28)
Replaced by draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
plain text pdf html
Stream
Stream state (No stream defined)
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG
IESG state Replaced by draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

Email authors IPR References Referenced by Nits Search lists

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-troan-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00.txt

Abstract

[RFC3315] was not written with the expectation that other stateful DHCPv6 options would be developed. [RFC3633] shoe-horned the new options for Prefix Delegation options for DHCPv6 into DHCPv6. Implementation experience of the CPE model described in [RFC6204] has shown multiple issues with the DHCPv6 protocol in supporting multiple stateful options.

Authors

Ole Troan (ot@cisco.com)
Bernie Volz (volz@cisco.com)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)