IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Pre-determining DUID

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Sat, 17 October 2009 13:31 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A127D3A6837 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 06:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zsDz0g+LKtlH for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 06:31:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 950193A68B5 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 06:31:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=volz@cisco.com; l=2117; q=dns/txt; s=rtpiport01001; t=1255786320; x=1256995920; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20"Bernie=20Volz=20(volz)"=20<volz@cisco.com> |Subject:=20RE:=20[dhcwg]=20Pre-determining=20DUID|Date: =20Sat,=2017=20Oct=202009=2009:31:56=20-0400|Message-ID: =20<8E296595B6471A4689555D5D725EBB210F149509@xmb-rtp-20a. amer.cisco.com>|To:=20"Tim=20Chown"=20<tjc@ecs.soton.ac.u k>,=20<dhcwg@ietf.org>|MIME-Version:=201.0 |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted-printable |In-Reply-To:=20<EMEW3=7C3426706e4ee987e57346471cda61502d l9ABHY03tjc=7Cecs.soton.ac.uk=7C1720.GA10763@login.ecs.so ton.ac.uk>|References:=20<fab4e42a0910091810j71fcabd8h12d 992be6d28d320@mail.gmail.com><FFE5030C-7341-471F-9731-EC0 69F857A01@nominum.com><20091011002522.GA26560@angus.ind.W PI.EDU><20091011101720.GA10763@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>=20< EMEW3=7C3426706e4ee987e57346471cda61502dl9ABHY03tjc=7Cecs .soton.ac.uk=7C1720.GA10763@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>; bh=+CIZ/KEoneiauZPU/jgDNuAuvE7IAVfmCxKwLNNif2c=; b=dAFEwKlw+Deifn4P18JeoMASA/aefuymtpQsvXOiprMLYZnjzyMEppd3 9O3lswLDOA7m1ntej+0kwg0uV5QQVl8vqqUESHYaPd74clAdbFjjL2cGz 4mfArcOEQmUbwEbsy4fHVaUVYBEPH+nNqyKmvcUBlHkyIz449duVGVrWn o=;
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEALdj2UpAZnwN/2dsb2JhbAC/HpdThDEEgVuJGg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,577,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="63543272"
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Oct 2009 13:31:58 +0000
Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n9HDVwKh019691; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:31:59 GMT
Received: from xmb-rtp-20a.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.15]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:31:58 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 09:31:56 -0400
Message-ID: <8E296595B6471A4689555D5D725EBB210F149509@xmb-rtp-20a.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <EMEW3|3426706e4ee987e57346471cda61502dl9ABHY03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|1720.GA10763@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] Pre-determining DUID
Thread-Index: AcpKXBEhmuFxIjLZQ2i+lKyy9QDkFgE0K17Q
References: <fab4e42a0910091810j71fcabd8h12d992be6d28d320@mail.gmail.com><FFE5030C-7341-471F-9731-EC069F857A01@nominum.com><20091011002522.GA26560@angus.ind.WPI.EDU><20091011101720.GA10763@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|3426706e4ee987e57346471cda61502dl9ABHY03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|1720.GA10763@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, dhcwg@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Oct 2009 13:31:58.0902 (UTC) FILETIME=[33C37D60:01CA4F2E]
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Pre-determining DUID
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:31:55 -0000

You might want to look at what Cablelabs did with DOCSIS 3.0 ... in
particular the Cablelabs device identifier vendor-specific option. This
works because there is a single mac-address for the CM and the CMTS
(relay) can insert this data in the flow between client and server
(whether client here is CM or CPE).

See
http://www.cablelabs.com/specifications/CL-SP-CANN-DHCP-Reg-I03-090811.p
df, section 5.2.15 Device Identifier Option.

At the time Cablelabs was working on this, we were discussing a "device
identifier" option that would be a standard DHC WG (IETF/IANA) assigned
option to provide a device identifier (most likely a mac-address, but it
was to be defined to support other identifiers) but it wasn't clear how
this would be used and how it would handle situations such as the case
of a device with multiple interfaces and hence multiple device
identifiers. One possibility is that as DHCPv6 requests would occur on
each interface separately, the Client Identifier (DUID) would contain
the same identifier for all requests but this "device identifier" would
specify that interface's mac-address. The DHCPv6 server could then use
the two values in different ways.

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Tim Chown
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 6:17 AM
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Pre-determining DUID

On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 08:25:22PM -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> 
> Here are the problems we have that I'm sure many others share:

I would echo these general comments for our site.  It's a very nice
summary of the issues.

It's a notable stumbling block for deploying DHCPv6 for our campus
enterprise.   There's some well-established processes in place for
DHCPv4 which become problematic with the introduction of DUIDs.

I'd certainly encourage Chuck to submit the 'problem statement' as
a draft before the Hiroshima cutoff.

-- 
Tim
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email