IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [dhcwg] FW: RFC3315 question

"Bernie Volz \(volz\)" <volz@cisco.com> Sat, 17 February 2007 22:46 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HIYJx-0001W3-GP; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:46:21 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HIYJw-0001Vt-IQ for dhcwg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:46:20 -0500
Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com ([171.68.10.87]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HIYJv-0006uO-8T for dhcwg@ietf.org; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:46:20 -0500
Received: from sj-dkim-7.cisco.com ([171.68.10.88]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2007 14:46:19 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,185,1170662400"; d="scan'208"; a="390198874:sNHT52782860"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com (sj-core-3.cisco.com [171.68.223.137]) by sj-dkim-7.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l1HMkI1q021288; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:46:18 -0800
Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l1HMkFho022279; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:46:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xmb-rtp-20a.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.15]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:46:15 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] FW: RFC3315 question
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 17:46:14 -0500
Message-ID: <8E296595B6471A4689555D5D725EBB2103467C88@xmb-rtp-20a.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <53EB64D1-7093-4C62-B063-BCF4571874D4@nominum.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [dhcwg] FW: RFC3315 question
Thread-Index: AcdS48FRGARo4rc5SIaXaeS8+S83TgAAZieg
From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Feb 2007 22:46:15.0542 (UTC) FILETIME=[6E554960:01C752E5]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=846; t=1171752378; x=1172616378; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim7002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=volz@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Bernie=20Volz=20\(volz\)=22=20<volz@cisco.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[dhcwg]=20FW=3A=20RFC3315=20question |Sender:=20; bh=51cafXhHkwblh6nr/8kK8yvOOCaS9pmdkOYIB0VeEok=; b=ahOWuD3Ag/GYSM55LrFYpoWMZ2aXI0FY3YQnr5Jq2AWH3HFB6VaJtxwXTmu5BmKIqLoltQQx 74oGM/6Dh+Tvw+90U6TSKuEvljpm3SdoROiQrvfC8gno0oqTSHxqRl9o;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-7; header.From=volz@cisco.com; dkim=pass (si g from cisco.com/sjdkim7002 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, "Ralph Droms (rdroms)" <rdroms@cisco.com>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

I didn't write that! Fred wrote that!!

- Bernie 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Lemon [mailto:Ted.Lemon@nominum.com] 
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 5:34 PM
To: Bernie Volz (volz)
Cc: Templin, Fred L; Ralph Droms (rdroms); dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] FW: RFC3315 question

On Feb 17, 2007, at 3:25 PM, Bernie Volz ((volz)) wrote:
> Just to get this idea out, how does one go about getting a new
> DUID type defined? In particular, it might be useful to define
> a new DUID type that includes a client's public key such as
> required by RFC3972. The actual format of the DUID type is for
> further study, e.g., in addition to the public key it might be
> desireable to include a link-layer address, a timestamp, etc.

How big is this key going to be?   I don't think a 1k identifier is a  
good idea.

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email