Re: [Geopriv] WGLC: draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-08

Makes sense to me to have this be consistent with rfc3825bis.  I'm assuming you mean this phrase: 

"

The DHCP server is assumed to have determined the location from the Circuit-ID Relay Agent Information Option (RAIO) defined (as SubOpt 1) in [2].

"

This seems to be saying "we're assuming it's done this way; if you can make it work otherwise, fine."  Would the corresponding change to James's document then be to change "MUST" to "can"?

--Richard

On Aug 27, 2010, at 8:32 AM, Marc Linsner wrote:

Why is this a MUST?

"
3. DHC Option Operation

  The [RFC3046] RAIO MUST be utilized to provide the appropriate
  indication to the DHCP Server where this DISCOVER or REQUEST message
  came from, in order to supply the correct response.  That said, this
  Option SHOULD NOT be in a DISCOVER message, because there is zero
  knowledge by the client of which Server will answer.
"

We (Martin, Bernard, and I) just had this conversation wrt 3825bis.  I can
build a DHC server with a backend location determination mechanism that does
not require RAIO.  I'm not suggesting this document describe an alternative
mechanism, I'm suggesting that RAIO be mentioned as one way to perform
location determination, not require it with a MUST.


-Marc-


On 8/23/10 6:24 AM, "Alissa Cooper" <acooper@cdt.org> wrote:

This is a GEOPRIV Working Group Last Call for comments on

draft-ietf-geopriv-dhcp-lbyr-uri-option-08

Please send your comments to the list by 6 September 2010.  As always,

please remember to send a note in if you've read the document and have

no other comments other than "its ready to go" - we need those as much

as we need "I found a problem."

_______________________________________________

Geopriv mailing list

Geopriv@ietf.org

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv