Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-00.txt

As one of these IT departments, I thought that some empirical data might be useful.

We have now got ISC dhcpd running on our main campus and I have just completed adding native IPv6 to the majority of networks.  We do NOT yet have DUIDs stored in our databases but do have the MAC address for the primary NIC for all University owned equipment.

I have the  hardware-ethernet included in each host declaration for both IPv4 and IPv6.  Using the ISC fudge of deconstructing the type 1 DUID, we have 1224 matches out of 1693 active leases.  Whilst not perfect, it is actually better than I expected and for us does add value.

I have not yet attempted to determine why we failed to match the remaining leases, could be a number of reasons

  1.  Private equipment for which we do not have a MAC in the DB
  2.  The DUID generated used a MAC we don't have in the DB
  3.  The MAC we have is wrong.
  4.  etc

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Glen Eustace, Infrastructure Development Engineer (BC/DR)
Information Technology Service, Massey University PN460
Tennent Drive, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Ph: +64-6-3569099 x 81005, Fax: +64-6-3505607, Mob: +64-27-4500321

From: "Ted com>" <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com<mailto:Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:49:59 +0000
To: Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com<mailto:akostur@incognito.com>>
Cc: "<dhcwg@ietf.org<mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>>" <dhcwg@ietf.org<mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>>, Marc Perea <marccp@srttel.com<mailto:marccp@srttel.com>>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-00.txt

On Jul 12, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Andre Kostur wrote:
Ok, if we're restricting to ISP environments, why not mandate in such
environments that they should be using the Remote ID (RFC 4649) to
specify the downstream "client".  Note that in DOCSIS environments,
this is already happening.  (Just not in RFC 4649 form... but in an
enterprise-specific option 17).

It's my understanding that the main motivator for this draft is use in corporate IT departments that inventory machines by MAC address.   I guess it would also be useful for ISPs, but that's certainly not the use case that I've heard mentioned most.

_______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org<mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg