RE: [dhcwg] Interface

"Bernie Volz (EUD)" <> Tue, 18 September 2001 19:53 UTC

Received: from ( [] (may be forged)) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA00911; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 15:53:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (localhost []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA00033; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 15:52:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (odin []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA00008 for <>; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 15:52:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA00869 for <>; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 15:52:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f8IJp5Q11869 for <>; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:51:05 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f8IJp4G13854 for <>; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:51:04 -0500 (CDT)
Received: FROM BY ; Tue Sep 18 14:51:01 2001 -0500
Received: by with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <P4M0376M>; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:51:00 -0500
Message-ID: <>
From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <>
To: "'Guja, ArturX'" <>,
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] Interface
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:50:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1407B.3D6A0D40"
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <>

The client *MUST* send the messages through the interface being configured. The client uses multicast messages and if directly received by the server, that's the way it knows what link the client is on. If a relay receives it and forwards it, that's how it can tag the message having come from that link so that the server knows what link the client is on. If the server doesn't know the correct link, it can't assign the proper addresses.

Note however that I feel if a server had told the client it may use unicast and the client has addresses of sufficient scope, there is no reason why the client must use that interface. This requires that client's source address is one of the addresses for that interface that is of "value" to the server in identifying the correct link. For example, a globally unique address would likely be of sufficient scope.

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Guja, ArturX []
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:33 PM
Subject: [dhcwg] Interface

Sorry for posting so many questions, but I'm working overtime on my
diploma here. I'm really grateful for any input.

So another one:
Is the client required to send DHCPv6 messages through the interface it is
going to configure, or can it send them through any interface?
I mean, why should there be such a restriction? After all, it sends
the DUID and the link-local address in the message. It might as well
use ANY interface for communication with the server, eg. when it is
multi-homed, and there is a DHCP server available on only one link,
but it serves the whole net :)))

I know it was mentioned somewhere, but I can't find it. :)))
Soory to bother you :)))


dhcwg mailing list