[dhcwg] question about duid in dhcpv6

Ð¤ïr <xiaoyang007@gmail.com> Fri, 02 October 2009 16:02 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=K4XFKTs/z4tsXSPAma0QhLYilNCVuPu8cdYrdbWg3XSsoOXRfUXa1ffnrVN5psPqKL L99azQIj8q7zcOFCcNTDlx5JM11JsyKRVJy80mwkDLyJyvhofDzDI5dLN3/A/ezBOgMK 5kPPtJMrqJG6RrAyJWSEFpLj+ZSwIVU3vZbvw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 00:03:52 +0800
Message-ID: <7302d480910020903u1fe8ec2dqfc5c7e0ae2a39e49@mail.gmail.com>
From: 肖�r <xiaoyang007@gmail.com>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0015177412180db7d30474f5e934"
Subject: [dhcwg] question about duid in dhcpv6
Precedence: list

Dear sir,

I am a graduate student from BUPT, China. Recently, I am doing some research
to add some feature to DHCPv6. However, I have a question about the usage of
DUID field to ask you.

Considering such a scenario: server wants to send client a message with the
Server Identifier Option preserving DUID field as a special address. When
client receives the message, it will try to interpret DUID as an address for
further processing, such as verification. I am confused because in the RFC
3315, it mentions that "Clients and servers MUST treat DUIDs as opaque
values and MUST only compare DUIDs for equality. Clients and servers MUST
NOT in any other way interpret DUIDs", so I want to ask you whether it
violates the RFC 3315?

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best Regards.

Xiao Yang

[dhcwg] question about duid in dhcpv6 Ð¤ïr
Re: [dhcwg] question about duid in dhcpv6 Ted Lemon