Re: [dhcwg] 3315bis question: Changing default DUID to DUID-LL?

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 24 May 2016 02:26 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2071E12D0B6 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2016 19:26:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ivl7tWLJUC3G for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2016 19:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x235.google.com (mail-lf0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A27D12D0A0 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2016 19:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x235.google.com with SMTP id e130so1028687lfe.3 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2016 19:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cauKcYnKASh5Q9XGjcMqhNRTd5GxYezIXMHpRveUBdw=; b=v1cl2MJ1k5FLk9AdP5NX3ZQ64jaTh6vOUn1RC4t4uBzYzbZ8H3nV3Q2dwroPQUxYJo X9ke3R4+XqkLqr8O9eGuZ1Ds1BqzjQQRJ+7epd0b/wy76FQySGb3eDtkSeKsUD8jV8Ku Vwmv+Mg42Wfe8xp/ohrmBxKp9v2pJ3o779V/NE1GbYi3/e27QymMjY7aPQbqYpwIo5Qw Id4KuMnUBeOWau3IdrFHAks+4pGZ9iBlwOe5Y3C62+kMlZ6CyYoetIdfgi7o6Zihae7a sYUn81rAmkHgfzTLDfdjLf2z+REBVZbdvGtRhor9hvuQZrhj6sgTAz22OewTF9b3gZFf 5UYA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cauKcYnKASh5Q9XGjcMqhNRTd5GxYezIXMHpRveUBdw=; b=D63pKWcPAjV4Rz+x/L7ArBt+S5Qf1qUZXfM1JATFWNj1+c3cIDqCXwXZJAT5ut20/+ 6HSIKH0BXlybvVayo2vWlsasEFFVRCsJ9rqPDngd3VUgyfzH22gxRCLj2RN93irAFzMW liwXScTfeq9nJMSuFTjLvHGoF3lLceNPf93UdKhfAAdCFZSpRHmOxNCjAepwc5PDWe/v jHef+44cqEBX6i3m6F/SjvYmcKG6B2iaD8n/yIb4JPIXE538Sb83MuD+bXNBwjUKggIg lzjjuOAQqLWkxpEsXJFePIND1BZ024JpT2/2zg9X0bBEAJmMhHCEcwTjuYQjN1WUKCbY keUw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXanR+aAGwRYv23mUlDsCBOIwzH1HhApYpZiNS5abWrTWIPLURMqbP1HmysWmIlIQZ17pYe+f7Dx3hR0Q==
X-Received: by 10.25.215.30 with SMTP id o30mr6093736lfg.132.1464056805599; Mon, 23 May 2016 19:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.153.135 with HTTP; Mon, 23 May 2016 19:26:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAedzxp=1JQC=f_bhib3JMoK2Pp8JF=Gpv0=F+gwk2-8+W7F-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <574093A8.5040300@gmail.com> <574361A4.9040907@gmail.com> <1914325.ChlqIaE1GT@uberpc.marples.name> <CAPt1N1=Zc-nfHX6F0EMDpnJ178+RUHV8cZRqBk6JRfSZPwjLYA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxrk0KurGJaNx_T2A6ACj9Eio5RDKdzATdvK8JGx6yd0hw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1kPyc-MOzML8RavuhjhsTGVFMp=pMPr3aF2j5coA1qWLw@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxp=1JQC=f_bhib3JMoK2Pp8JF=Gpv0=F+gwk2-8+W7F-A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 22:26:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1mqCAWW0TMEpVufronYThL0qAOMwB6qZ_-sbuCymWfNkQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1140e420d43e9505338d4918
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/p3joIn9568iIRBPyGzN9Bv99I9Q>
Cc: dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] 3315bis question: Changing default DUID to DUID-LL?
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 24 May 2016 02:26:52 -0000

Hm, to be clear, the intention was that a large manufacturer of devices
might want their own number space, not that a large organization purchasing
heterogeneous devices might then generate DUIDs for those devices out of a
single enterprise number space.   I may have misunderstood what you were
suggesting.

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 9:33 PM, Erik Kline <ek@google.com> wrote:

> Hmm, that's not how I would have read that -EN section.  When I read
> "enterprise" I think more of "for guaranteed unique use within a
> private space" than "these are my unique numbers to give away to all
> my friends".
>
> I would never have guessed this use case was an intention (though of
> course it makes sense).
>
> On 24 May 2016 at 10:18, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, but they don't do that, so it doesn't matter.  That _is_ why we
> came
> > up with DUID-EN, but as far as I can tell it was a flop. :(
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Erik Kline <ek@google.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> It could also be edited for big orgs to use a Vendor-assigned unique
> ID
> >> >> based
> >> >> on Enterprise Number, which I'm pretty sure satisfied the
> provisioning
> >> >> case.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I've never actually heard of anyone doing this, although I agree that
> >> > you
> >> > are correct in theory.   :)
> >>
> >> But might this solve your use case?  If the vendor got an enterprise
> >> number and each device was flashed with a unique DUID-EN that was also
> >> printed on the box...?
> >
> >
>