Subject: RE: renewal time

From: Bernie Volz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 15:01:27 -0400

Jim, I agree with the renewal time strategy.

I do agree with Ted that the server should send it:

	I don't think there's a good technical reason to have the server
	calculate the renewal time.   The only reason I suggest having the
	server do it is that it's less likely that the implementor will
screw
	up their implementation and release a client that gets into renewal
	storms when one of its addresses becomes non-renewable.   Based on
my
	experience in IPv4 land, I actually think this is a strong enough
	reason to justify the additional 64 bytes from the server.

- Bernie Volz

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Bound [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 2:54 PM
To: DHCPv6 discussion list
Subject: Re: renewal time

>Can you clarify what you mean? Are you proposing to base the renewal time
on
>an address lifetime? Or, are you referring to the T1/T2 times like in
>DHCPv4?

It was the Ted/Jim discussion thread.  I view the renewal time like the
T1/T2 times in DCHPv4.

>I'd vote to pass a "lease time" in the packets. The renewal times (if we
use
>T1/T2 values as in DHCPv4) can be set in the spec (with options/extensions
>to override defaults if a site needs it).

This would be my suggestion too.  The lease time (preferred and valid
times) have to be in the packet like we have in the existing address
extension.  

What Ted is proposing is the client only can send a REQUEST when the
renewal timer goes off or that is how will work as it is based on the
least value of preferred timers.  This will work.  So in that sense its
like the T1 and T2 but adds to DHCPv6 when the client will REQUEST new
addresses.  If we do this I think we can do it with a defined algorithm
for the client in the spec.  Mike and I can make first pass at it to
get a spec out per the deadline.  Is what I was asking.

But I should ask? 

Do other folks not agree with the renewal time strategy so far we have
really only heard from Ralph, Ted, and me?  That's hardly consensus, and
not trying to force this but trying to get a spec for us to discuss by
early october or sept 30th.

Bernie what do you think?
Francis what do you think?
others.....what do you think?

thanks
/jim

---

From: Jim Bound <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 15:09:28 -0400

bernie,

OK.. I am going to go with you and Ted then?  thats 3 of us.
????? others ????

regards,
/jim