Telechat Review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-unknown-msg-05

Request Review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-unknown-msg
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Telechat Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2014-03-25
Requested 2014-03-04
Authors Yong Cui, Qi Sun, Ted Lemon
Draft last updated 2014-03-20
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -05 by Suresh Krishnan (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -06 by Suresh Krishnan (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Chris Lonvick (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -05 by Carlos Pignataro (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Carlos Pignataro
State Completed
Review review-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-unknown-msg-05-opsdir-telechat-pignataro-2014-03-20
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 08)
Review result Has Nits
Review completed: 2014-03-20



As a member of the Operations Directorate I have reviewed the following draft which is in IETF last call for it's operational impact.

This document specifies the how a DHCPv6 server, client or relay agent should behave when receiving unknown DHCPv6 messages. In doing tis, it aims to update RFC 3315.

Summary: Ready with minor issues

The document is very thorough, detailed and well written. It considers backwards and forward implications.


The document says:

5.  Client and Server Behavior Update

   A client or server MUST silently discard any received DHCPv6 message
   with an unknown message type.

I understand that "silently" here means without triggering/eliciting the generation of a packet, but I assume "silently" does not mean without issuing a management log or notification. I should not have to make this assumption, and Section 5 should be clear as to what a DHCPv6 client/server MAY/SHOULD do to log and to notify of those messages with unknown message type. Otherwise, new messages will not generate any management indication of not being understood.

I'd recommend splitting the recommendation on what DHCPv6 server/client need to do regarding DHCPv6 packets, and what they ought to do from an operational stand point.

Hope this helps.


-- Carlos.