RE: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-3315id-for-v4-03

Perhaps I'm not understanding the issue fully, but isn't this a
problem if a client first sends NO client identifier (to boot)
and then (once the O/S is running) sends a client identifier?
Agreed that today many client identifiers are generated from
the hardware address and 3315id makes this more problematic
(since we don't want servers to look into the DUID) but this,
IMHO, is a general problem whenever this switch from no-client
identifier to client identifier happens. So, it is a general
DHCP issue not really specific to 3315id.

- Bernie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org] 
> On Behalf Of David W. Hankins
> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 6:44 PM
> To: dhcwg@ietf.org
> Cc: rbhibbs@pacbell.net
> Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-3315id-for-v4-03
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 05:58:04PM -0400, Bernie Volz wrote:
> > I believe this really is more appropriate in 
> > draft-ietf-dhc-implementation-*.txt, though the (01) draft 
> appears to 
> > have
> 
> I don't have a copy of that draft, so I can only guess that 
> it attempts to clarify the server's behaviour in regards to 
> the original Client Identifier?
> 
> How is that the right place for defining the expected 
> behaviour of the server when it encounters the v6 DUID from 
> v4 clients that previously were only identified by chaddr?
> 
> Sure, if we decide not to go ahead with the v6 DUID (not 
> likely), I think reviving that draft would be noble, but...I 
> like the v6 DUID.
> 
> 
> I think we should just define the sane and rational behaviour 
> we expect of the server when it encounters the mixed 
> identities, since we already appear to have a consensus on 
> what that should be.
> 
> Sending the draft to RFC knowing full well we're going to 
> have to submit similar clarifying work on its contents later 
> seems like a lot more work to me.  We could just avoid all that.
> 
> -- 
> David W. Hankins		"If you don't do it right the 
> first time,
> Operations Engineer			you'll just have to do 
> it again."
> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.		-- Jack T. Hankins
> 

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