[dhcwg] Extreme Interest in : IPv4 Address Conflict Detection

"Lynn Linse" <lynnl@lantronix.com> Sat, 20 April 2002 17:50 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05205 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:50:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id NAA08391 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:50:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost []) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA08251; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:46:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin []) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA08222 for <dhcwg@ns.ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:46:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sjwc380101.int.lantronix.com (clarify-web.lantronix.com [] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05121 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:45:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sj580004wcom.int.lantronix.com ([]) by sjwc380101.int.lantronix.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Sat, 20 Apr 2002 10:45:58 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 10:45:58 -0700
Message-ID: <603BA0CFF3788E46A0DB0918D9AA95100122CD17@sj580004wcom.int.lantronix.com>
Thread-Topic: Extreme Interest in : IPv4 Address Conflict Detection
Thread-Index: AcHok7k4pIedFeD1SuqVEGYZA3Pw4g==
From: Lynn Linse <lynnl@lantronix.com>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Apr 2002 17:45:58.0640 (UTC) FILETIME=[3ABD3700:01C1E893]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id NAA08223
Subject: [dhcwg] Extreme Interest in : IPv4 Address Conflict Detection
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
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

This draft seems to have been jettisoned - any idea if it's dead or moved or merged or renamed?  Stuart Cheshire had said this was under discussion in both DHC and MobileIP WG.

I'm working with GM (as in cars) and Rockwell Automation.

A severe problems we are hitting in the field with Ethernet+TCP/IP products is wide variation and unpredictable behavior in duplicate IP cases between multiple vendor's devices. Some devices go off-line, some defend, some have a race condition where it depends who sees who first as to what will happen. A device unexpectedly going off-line can cost lots of $$$ to recover, or in rare cases even kill workers or damage hundreds of thousands of $$$ worth of attached equipment. This is part of the reason that Ethernet has taken decades longer to reach the factory floor.

Keep in mind one rarely see PC (either Windows or Linux or Mac) in these plant floor systems, but instead have a wide variety of small devices with diverse in-house (roll-your-own) TCP stacks. Many of these products also use fixed (manually set) IP. DHCP is considered a risk since it creates yet-another critical failure point, so many products even "cheat" and allow using BOOTP to assign an Ip which is then coded into NVRAM and BOOTP is never called again unless a DHCP "FORCERENEW" is issued to in effect unset the old NVRAM IP and cause reissue of BOOTP. Sounds odd, but it gets the job done.

Add these together means we need a documented way (an RFC?) to both predict WHAT happens in duplicate IP cases and to help guide all these roll-your-own TCP stack writers to do it the consistent way. 

best regards

Lynn August Linse, Senior IA Application Engineer
15353 Barranca Parkway, Lantronix Inc, Irvine  CA  92618
lynn.linse@lantronix.com   www.lantronix.com
Tel: (949)279-3969  Fax: (949)453-7152

dhcwg mailing list