On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 07:17 -0400, Ralph Droms wrote: > There is another difference between REBIND and RENEW: the client > includes the Server Identifier of the server from which the client > received the IA in the RENEW message (but not the REBIND).
Yes. My question could be summarised I suppose as "what's the point of REBIND?" You answer that: > The idea is that some external data channel is used to replicate the > IA binding from the responsible server to all the other servers. And there is no such channel. As you say: > There's no such mechanism defined in DHCPv4 (RFC 2131 and RFC 2132), > either. It may be an oversight that it is not mentioned as "out of > scope" in RFC 3315. The separately defined (albeit still draft) failover system is that mechanism for DHCPv4. So, at the moment and absent any failover for DHCPv6, there is no point to REBIND except for the dubious benefit that addresses that are no good any more can possibly be confirmed as duds by other servers. Regards, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au) http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer http://twitter.com/kauer389 GPG fingerprint: B862 FB15 FE96 4961 BC62 1A40 6239 1208 9865 5F9A Old fingerprint: AE1D 4868 6420 AD9A A698 5251 1699 7B78 4EEE 6017 -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
