Re: [dhcwg] What happens to clients that sends a DHCPDECLINE

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Wed, 23 August 2006 21:17 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GG06M-0007Vp-74; Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:17:30 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GG06L-0007Vj-HC for dhcwg@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:17:29 -0400
Received: from shell-ng.nominum.com ([81.200.64.181]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GG06J-00062c-Vl for dhcwg@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:17:29 -0400
Received: from mail.nominum.com (mail.nominum.com [81.200.64.186]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by shell-ng.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD7D556821; Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:17:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL: -1.862,BAYES_99: 4.07,HTML_40_50: 0.052, HTML_MESSAGE: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
Received: from [66.93.162.130] ([66.93.162.130]) (authenticated user mellon@nominum.com) by mail.nominum.com (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher AES128-SHA (128 bits)); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:17:11 -0700
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:17:09 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <86CE91CAB9446F4CAED7E3C3F664DA58035D5AC1@zcarhxm1.corp.nortel.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] What happens to clients that sends a DHCPDECLINE
References: <86CE91CAB9446F4CAED7E3C3F664DA58035D5AC1@zcarhxm1.corp.nortel.com>
To: Yi Chen <yichen@nortel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v840)
Message-Id: <A4114B59-14B4-418A-8A17-FD106B27870A@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.840)
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1066455972=="
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

On Aug 23, 2006, at 2:09 PM, Yi Chen wrote:
> However, what the RFC doesn't seem to cover is what happen if the IP  
> being DECLINEd is a static DHCP host. Should the DHCP server keep  
> ignoring the client or give it a dynamic IP from an appropriate  
> range? Since the purpose of a static DHCP host is to make sure that  
> client always gets the same IP, I would think that ignoring the  
> client would be the right approach.But I thought I should ask the  
> people on this list who are much more experienced with DHCP than I  
> do :)

DHCPDECLINE is used by the client to indicate that the IP address that  
was leased is in use by some other device.   So ignoring a DHCPDECLINE  
is a bad idea.   What you should do instead is to notify the  
administrator with some urgency that the IP address is in use.    
Whether to offer the client another IP address, or to ignore it until  
such time as the problem is corrected, is probably something that  
should be configurable by the operator.

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg