Re: [dhcwg] Option 60 VCI

Jake Howerton <jake@capanis.com> Wed, 28 April 2004 00:25 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA13208 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:25:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIcqh-0006ZR-SV for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:22:51 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i3S0MpBJ025250 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:22:51 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIclL-0006AJ-H5 for dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:17:19 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA12988 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:17:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIclH-0001b2-Fa for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:17:15 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIckJ-0001U9-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:16:16 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIcjh-0001OE-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:15:37 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIceH-0005I7-Mv; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:10:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIblK-0005Tz-Br for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:13:14 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA09481 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:13:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIblG-0001WC-TC for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:13:10 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIbkK-0001Qy-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:12:13 -0400
Received: from mail.nettera.net ([66.246.92.2] helo=athena.nettera.net) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIbjl-0001Gc-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:11:37 -0400
Received: (qmail 25453 invoked by uid 2520); 27 Apr 2004 23:04:28 -0000
Received: from jake@capanis.com by athena.nettera.net by uid 2020 with qmail-scanner-1.20rc3 (clamuko: 0.60. spamassassin: 2.60. Clear:RC:1:. Processed in 0.265103 secs); 27 Apr 2004 23:04:28 -0000
Received: from pool-68-237-66-215.ny325.east.verizon.net (HELO ?192.168.0.101?) (68.237.66.215) by brainvisuals.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 2004 23:04:28 -0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1309
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:04:27 -0400
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Option 60 VCI
From: Jake Howerton <jake@capanis.com>
To: "Kostur, Andre" <akostur@incognito.com>, <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <BCB45F3B.B231%jake@capanis.com>
In-Reply-To: <B34580038487494C8B7F36DA06160B870125C188@homer.incognito.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3165937467_26968508"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL, HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60

Andre,

I am not having trouble seperating the cable modems since as you say they
are DOCSIS compatible and are sending option 60.  I was looking to put
wireless Aps and consumer routers onto separate subnets also.  This would
allow me to protect the Aps somewhat.  And would allow me to ban the use of
wireless routers putting holes in my network.  For the Aps I can enter the
MACs manually into separate pools, but the person who setup the network is
long gone.  And we have almost 1000 access points.  So I was looking for the
easy way out.    I have not figured out how to identify the consumer
wireless routers though.

Jake Howerton

On 4/27/04 6:43 PM, "Kostur, Andre" <akostur@incognito.com> wrote:

> You don't really mention in what way you want to separate your devices.  The
> cable modems are easily identifiable since they are following the DOCSIS
> specifications, and DOCSIS mandates that option 60 must be of a certain form.
> As far as I know there is no general requirement.  From a DHCP standpoint
> there is no requirement that option 60 is sent at all.
> 
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Jake Howerton [mailto:jake@capanis.com]
>> > Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 1:30 PM
>> > To: dhcwg@ietf.org
>> > Subject: [dhcwg] Option 60 VCI
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Do all clients transmit option 60?  I am trying to separate
>> > devices on my 
>> > network and am looking to find out if linksys and other
>> > consumer routers
>> > transmit option 60 as well as consumer and enterprise Aps
>> > like the Orinoco
>> > AP1000.  I have my cable modems working with this method.  If
>> > there are any 
>> > other effective ways to do this, suggestions are appreciated.
>