Minutes IETF100: dhc
|Meeting Minutes||Dynamic Host Configuration (dhc) WG|
|Title||Minutes IETF100: dhc|
|Other versions||plain text|
DHC WG Agenda for IETF-100 (Singapore)
Date: Thursday, November 16, 2017, 18:10-19:10 (UT + 8), Afternoon session III
Chairs: Tomek Mrugalski (TM) & Bernie Volz (BV)
Secretary: none (open)
1. Administrativia (Agenda Bashing, WG Status, ...), Chairs
- BV and TM presented the Adminstrativia slides
- Eliot Lear (EL) Please move item 2 to the bottom.
- BV - I'd prefer to leave it.
- TM - These aren't the only items.
2. Future of DHC WG - recharter?, Chairs
- TM presented the Future of the working group slides.
- Suresh Krishnan (responsible AD) requested move item 1 (update
DHCPv6 base spec and publish as std) to the end as it is less
important in the overall WG activity.
- Chairs will update charter text and send it to the WG for review
before submitting it.
3. DHCPv6 Yang Model, Ian Farrer (IF)
- The model in its current state is too big. Dividing into specific functional
models (server, client, relay) would help with the review.
- IF pointed out that there number of open issues with the draft
would warrant using some sort of an issue tracker. Two options
(using IETF hosted trac-based issue tracker or one hosted on
github) were discussed, but no clear decision has been made.
- EL volunteered. Happy to contribute and review. EL added: would like to get
involved because of the long term implications, how to deploy configuration
after the device is capable of sending packets, how to protect the
information being deployed. A point has been made that the model may even
outlive the DHCPv6 protocol.
- IF - we could do RFC7227 equivalent for yang extensions
- IF - asked for volunteers to review and potentially co-auther document
- volunteers: Tim Winter, Bernie Volz, Eliot Lear, Robert Nagy, Tomek
4. DHCP/DHCPv6 options for LWM2M bootstrapping, Srinivasa Rao Nallurim (SN)
- SN presented the slides. The draft was reviewed by two IOT experts and
some of them were addressed. One open ended comment raised a fear
that the proposal right now causes more security problems than it
solves. It is uncertain at this stage how to address this
comment. No specific decisions has been made and the work on this
draft will continue.
5. DHCPv6 options for MQTT client configuration, Srinivasa Rao Nallurim (SN)
- SN presented the slides.
- SN is looking for more WG feedback on both documents; BV provided some
to the mailing list earlier in the week
- There was a discussion about how many of these IoT related options there
and is the the best way to go for these options? If there are other
standards organizations, perhaps they should use the Vendor-Identifying
options (DHCPv6 options 16 & 17, DHCPv4 RFC 3925) that these organizations
could use - similar to the CableLabs DOCSIS options (mostly for V6). That
would be a far better way to go and the standards organization then as
control of the options and can publish themselves. OASIS was mentioned in
this context, but the chairs generally felt there was not enough experts in
the room to make specific recommendation.
The session ended at 19:10.
Minutes prepared by Bernie Volz from etherpad notes by Tomek Mrugalski (and
Last updated: December 20, 2017