IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com> Thu, 28 May 2015 12:19 UTC

Return-Path: <volz@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035CA1A90CC; Thu, 28 May 2015 05:19:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tEHW4Fv056UE; Thu, 28 May 2015 05:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E6441A9096; Thu, 28 May 2015 05:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1706; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1432815573; x=1434025173; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=yagRW9u3TJkw1zsu74fuAgC0ASibttTK6vHrDS7ALcY=; b=eMbbMnMWfOO4yU++0690PqwDD6FqWKSQNE7xeqAwDwhFVGrlW4nZ28MB on29rS4QmToLAtzEADBnOeFfED4qdu86flMftlDxR2JYJqgSw/Coh51EL tOJVUgUk2/Uim6q4DJpWshAuEAHDrPe8B8oFl55w/N9Y0JOrUsWGMkVkX g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D7AwBgBmdV/40NJK1cgxCBMga+ZwmHUQKBUjgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhCIBAQEDATo/BQcEAgEIEQQBAQsUBQQHMhQDAQUIAgQOBQiIHQjUOgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAReLQ4RVMQcGgxGBFgEEhUqNPqI+I2GBWoE9b4FGgQEBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,513,1427760000"; d="scan'208";a="154071849"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 May 2015 12:19:32 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x13.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x13.cisco.com [173.37.183.87]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t4SCJWIq022297 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 28 May 2015 12:19:32 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com ([169.254.8.169]) by xhc-rcd-x13.cisco.com ([173.37.183.87]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 28 May 2015 07:19:32 -0500
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: "sthaug@nethelp.no" <sthaug@nethelp.no>
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHQmT9ltDl6HqSEb0aj/PuRE3LveJ2RTfqQ
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 12:19:32 +0000
Message-ID: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1CAF6142@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
References: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1CAF5DA3@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <55670179.8030400@cs.tcd.ie> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1CAF5EC1@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <20150528.141105.74661164.sthaug@nethelp.no>
In-Reply-To: <20150528.141105.74661164.sthaug@nethelp.no>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.98.1.200]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/AJQptinFWYLUvCQQjZL-YF_IjpE>
Cc: "Ted.Lemon@nominum.com" <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>, "draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation.shepherd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation.shepherd@ietf.org>, "dhc-chairs@ietf.org" <dhc-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation.ad@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation.ad@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, "stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Thu, 28 May 2015 12:19:35 -0000

If Windows were to implement this support, I am sure they would make use of an appropriate identifier.

Note also that there is work going on in the DHC WG to address privacy issues - see draft-ietf-dhc-anonymity-profile-00. And one of the authors (the primary author) is from Microsoft so I am sure this is on their radar.

- Bernie 

-----Original Message-----
From: sthaug@nethelp.no [mailto:sthaug@nethelp.no] 
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 8:11 AM
To: Bernie Volz (volz)
Cc: stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie; draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation.shepherd@ietf.org; dhc-chairs@ietf.org; draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation@ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org; dhcwg@ietf.org; draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation.ad@ietf.org; Ted.Lemon@nominum.com
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

> It needs a MUST because the DHCP protocol (RFC 2131/2132) specifies that the client-identifier option is OPTIONAL. If not present, the mac-address is used. And as has already been discussed, the mac-address is not a good choice here because of the tunnel interface.
> 
> Thus, this document REQUIRES that the client use the client-identifier option when using shared-v4-allocation requests - the option is not optional.

I understand the reasoning behind the requirement. However - as far as I know, Windows is (by far) the most common user of client-identifier
- and sets the client identifier to the same value as the MAC address.

Do we have reason to believe that the Windows behavior would be changed given a MUST in this document?

Steinar Haug, AS 2116

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email