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

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 24 May 2016 01:19 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 9238812D4FC for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2016 18:19:28 -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 mtysgx3mFWVC for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2016 18:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x22e.google.com (mail-lb0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e]) (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 0851112D585 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2016 18:19:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id k7so618793lbm.0 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2016 18:19:24 -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=1UswfIC5Zedybrapcp4ytH8YccL0NOTb53BwI6t88nY=; b=lWFgsvAfMSN/bkEoEZ3CoN71Wrj4Jn2eX69nEJaE6Yex6KruNcuY1HrBDrvPwyVw1Q bs7tRsNv8o4tun8TSBkSnABp1L0alaY+Rd4AhfR3ZrB8QSWv33Po1ZSiS2nHCHrHtxj2 jpxFUqVjWzD8UQavQZhazXtfgXfg39W6eoRfjpN3kRBsWnBegQXyZbnr0/gTBvr2jnKV c4bTZpJCQE0XYIKGsTuCcCt3aO8oyjRiDZWo4IHYtwsMEJd6z7ZMKtypM67KcXuif8oh CdtPZOxfLI8Gw/8eKBLgBrhFw6nqUJC47c0TGPgRWNG6tCH2O5B6gBfLVMRF2Ie/qmiN 2uNw==
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=1UswfIC5Zedybrapcp4ytH8YccL0NOTb53BwI6t88nY=; b=klM2q/4i4VAZf4u2JjCRr3qWlKyC4vbrDA0HLzLadiXZox8azzzqHlY6AQv68CxyT9 QfwQ2grcKlevrmYlaqUtWZyVb5lO7sRkR7OrIC8gjhg2uwlF4lr3E9tvryzhnjUHG/Fc 35Tt9dd0PbvQbBqkUfV3zBsSmwznkKGSfF8n7Se1Dxl8tG2cj+YJ6YZJPJMwGLsTNu4w PQrwhNb/iQhI7UwjljAHUPS57HRoU+o2p16NqklKrPdNE/IXkepnwt98AjVBTMn7hl/H 2prL/bdt72tSOclzWFjrCbLzQkypEmTYx03Y+NcYbZvT4SjGib4Dun4ay2eRN4oRpmIx c2uA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUSG96Q8GUIJdky0yr/dn1u3L/01UknfhPl1pQdqeAyBN6V7c9bCDUIu9PWbL7h1s030V9hwUifcl1SKA==
X-Received: by 10.112.169.8 with SMTP id aa8mr6822540lbc.110.1464052763090; Mon, 23 May 2016 18:19:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.153.135 with HTTP; Mon, 23 May 2016 18:18:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAedzxrk0KurGJaNx_T2A6ACj9Eio5RDKdzATdvK8JGx6yd0hw@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>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 21:18:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1kPyc-MOzML8RavuhjhsTGVFMp=pMPr3aF2j5coA1qWLw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3878ae074eb05338c581e
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/wqoCoVDSFUZcT_9qpPKsRpAcUJY>
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 01:19:28 -0000

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...?
>