IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] issues with draft-grochla-80211-dhcp-option-00

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 24 September 2010 04:43 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82EC53A68EA for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.451
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.451 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ybmLrLrgzZlc for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og123.obsmtp.com (exprod7og123.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.24]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 335613A68DF for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob123.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTJwsjsUyPy3u8Atr7Qksk6gPISZQbdMV@postini.com; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:44:00 PDT
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (webmail.nominum.com [64.89.228.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "webmail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933C01B9365; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vpna-148.vpn.nominum.com (64.89.227.148) by exchange-01.win.nominum.com (64.89.228.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:43:56 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTincdkVZC39Xnap0oLkCff_BjNifDfjkNvJafVk1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:43:49 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <6BB35575-84CD-4506-B8FA-0AFE75C4B55C@nominum.com>
References: <201009221245.OAA25958@TR-Sys.de> <1AD25EE0-2766-456A-A2F4-5A0D1967D6E8@nominum.com> <016301cb5ac6$035a38e0$0a0eaaa0$@net> <FA8897B3-BE21-417F-BB4E-316A05D33252@nominum.com> <AANLkTincdkVZC39Xnap0oLkCff_BjNifDfjkNvJafVk1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] issues with draft-grochla-80211-dhcp-option-00
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 04:43:33 -0000

On Sep 23, 2010, at 6:01 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote:
> Just
> because the IETF isn't a vendor of products, there is no reason it
> shouldn't use the IETF OUI to create a code point to specify this
> hypothetical cipher suite in 802.11 frames. In fact, this is used as
> an example in RFC 5342.

True enough, but here it's not just a matter of choosing an OUI.   DHCP vendor-specific options have quite different semantics than regular DHCP options.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email