RE: [dhcwg] doubt regarding DHCPREQUEST

"Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se> Tue, 09 October 2001 16:51 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07991; Tue, 9 Oct 2001 12:51:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA28923; Tue, 9 Oct 2001 12:51:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA28898 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Oct 2001 12:51:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imr2.ericy.com (imr2.ericy.com [12.34.240.68]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07984 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Oct 2001 12:51:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mr6.exu.ericsson.se (mr6att.ericy.com [138.85.92.14]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f99GoZ023304 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Oct 2001 11:50:35 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se (eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.133.37]) by mr6.exu.ericsson.se (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f99GoZe04257 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Oct 2001 11:50:35 -0500 (CDT)
Received: FROM eamrcnt761.exu.ericsson.se BY eamrcnt747.exu.ericsson.se ; Tue Oct 09 11:50:35 2001 -0500
Received: by eamrcnt761.exu.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <4CP9SJCC>; Tue, 9 Oct 2001 11:50:35 -0500
Message-ID: <66F66129A77AD411B76200508B65AC697B373C@eambunt705.ena-east.ericsson.se>
From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>
To: 'venkat devarajan' <venkat026@hotmail.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] doubt regarding DHCPREQUEST
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 11:50:32 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C150E2.8293A670"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org

Actually, I had DHCPv6 on my brain when I responded. You're asking about DHCP for IPv4.

When a client doesn't yet have a lease on the address, it must broadcast since it has no valid source address. Also, the broadcast serves to indicate to other servers that they were not selected by the client and can 'release' the address that they temporarily allocated and offered to the client.

When a client has an address, the specification says it is unicast (RFC 2131):

  o DHCPREQUEST generated during RENEWING state:

      'server identifier' MUST NOT be filled in, 'requested IP address'
      option MUST NOT be filled in, 'ciaddr' MUST be filled in with
      client's IP address. In this situation, the client is completely
      configured, and is trying to extend its lease. This message will
      be unicast, so no relay agents will be involved in its
      transmission.  Because 'giaddr' is therefore not filled in, the
      DHCP server will trust the value in 'ciaddr', and use it when
      replying to the client.

"This message will be unicast".

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: venkat devarajan [mailto:venkat026@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 12:23 PM
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] doubt regarding DHCPREQUEST


Hi
does the client not know the server's IpAddress when getting a DHCPACK   
/DHCPOFFER ? i am referring to the 'siaddr' field in the dhcp packet 
structure .
Regrads,
Venkat

>From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <Bernie.Volz@am1.ericsson.se>
>To: "'venkat devarajan'" <venkat026@hotmail.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: [dhcwg] doubt regarding DHCPREQUEST
>Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 08:36:04 -0500
>
>The client may well not have an address of sufficient scope it can use to 
>communicate with the server.
>
>If the server and client are on the same link, then sure the link local 
>address could be used (and in this case the server could send the client 
>the unicast option in the Advertise).
>
>However, if the server is off-link, then the client can't communicate with 
>the server directly. Also, if you have multiple relays, won't it be useful 
>to be able to use the one that is up in case one fails?
>
>Also, remember that IPv6 uses a lot of multicasting (no broadcasting) and 
>hence only those systems that are playing a DHCP role will receive these 
>packets. So, the cost of multicasting them is not very high.
>
>- Bernie Volz
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: venkat devarajan [mailto:venkat026@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 7:54 AM
>To: dhcwg@ietf.org
>Subject: [dhcwg] doubt regarding DHCPREQUEST
>
>
>Hi ,
>I am Venkat working in Sun Microsystems.
>I have a doubt regarding the DHCPREQUEST message broadcast.
>
>Doubt:
>Why is a DHCPREQUEST for Address Reuse or an lease time extension broadcast
>to all other servers ? could it not be sent to that dhcp server alone that
>provided the client with the ip adrress ?
>
>Regards,
>Venkat
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>dhcwg mailing list
>dhcwg@ietf.org
>http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


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