Re: [homenet] ISPs using DHCP for individual clients

Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 22 November 2020 02:11 UTC

Return-Path: <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF0213A0C3F for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:11:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 3LUffXiStYaG for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:11:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe35.google.com (mail-vs1-xe35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e35]) (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 4BE353A0C36 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:11:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe35.google.com with SMTP id h185so7267986vsc.3 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:11:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=rJafkgdumb9LFpl3XJuY5xUvH1zP2bhvWYYMJvkt0e4=; b=ZTQfxOBya9Kak1ApaRNh7WnodIYOHL0ROo5iz+Z+J8bMAAaE6/ppEN4+6Jj9etilK4 4evN+zTodkKnWmn8exk0or2XYAw6Z8eqaFOn7Nj68yGuGIor/MTx1UoK34VFmLLMLySF AMPolKiTi2CmuwzJFBc8caXPWgpWYFUuV5d+9lTt+b1mQ3Xf9HI9amUfe7Jh/Egk1D1z ectMHRBCXM7W/RzGfSB2QtzPaUZIFlgHq6i7Y4QUIKjno3dTyaFjigMhUr1j9QGWCypn ab35cYBX15EfXoAa4upw4pUUo77bEhAU5ykKwQqSVTyrC8ckvG4RXTaUSTxWsb07nWxG iS0Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=rJafkgdumb9LFpl3XJuY5xUvH1zP2bhvWYYMJvkt0e4=; b=f6S21Zg0cF96d2OwJ31rai24Jp6nKTc6+KBgjSi3jm5NBbpxX3CR/KfWK1IMqpmJF4 CGxbkyqr/mcS2qCVtkaXyiEEfWAfddcInWx6pejvY+Ry6/IH+aioEDsNaQNRg9qiao49 FeN3hSbSKgmNMY3P2l2a4k6Dto1QqMypAQRIXZzWWw5kuvlnUFGh6YnrOzenyRN7B2fs Jbbz94/vbjqhxLDHgAxtsrs5H6q5Huv9fYdBoIHuPCVOrcfxZC/0q+R9P+MS8HEkSbEF APVWbwihBVUSPilrvVHYahWOkLxQrJxlXH14Tm33/dOFttVtN/88x0V2P5J+VKzP2VAz IHtg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5339AnUM8rTnIRhPolN63Sx+JOya/DLLZ3EnCnJ33tZS9JaK7Yeg bnzxyIkXpEt3I7uK8pT0i79ipIu/adEbVZarLvs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxIbn7dKxnbLggS+ERS6jgAvtMcd9gYboRAJyrEDTUEdaiD0JxAUq8uu6xi6v7whYaQJO8QvcdtL3Tsmg20uAY=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:309a:: with SMTP id l26mr17086784vsb.4.1606011101089; Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:11:41 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADZyTkn5nFDwNZev1ggj2do7uLcr=M9EKT8mmaiFPXhPaObBwg@mail.gmail.com> <4C575E84-7828-41EB-B57F-6B5FDDBD457B@gmx.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C575E84-7828-41EB-B57F-6B5FDDBD457B@gmx.com>
From: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:11:30 -0500
Message-ID: <CADZyTknmbrbN8CqN_wceZhS6evRZm_OD5dwotFu+1J0aq1o0FA@mail.gmail.com>
To: ianfarrer@gmx.com
Cc: homenet <homenet@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002f93a205b4a899cc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/O6qMAC7d90CWACORSB98Xaf1-WE>
Subject: Re: [homenet] ISPs using DHCP for individual clients
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 02:11:44 -0000

Thanks for the response Ian,

This seems to confirm that assuming per-subscribers responses is something
widely deployed.

Thanks!

Yours,
Daniel

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 10:57 AM <ianfarrer@gmx.com> wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> I can’t speak to A), but we have built and tested DHCPv6 infrastructure
> using ISC’s Kea with a Cassandra based back end with quite a bit of
> per-subscriber logic. The remote-id option is supplied by the relay and
> contains a number of flags, depending on the services the customer
> subscribes to. These indicate which options the response contains, for
> things like:
>
>
>    - Single/multiple IPv6 prefixes for different service types
>    - IA_NA for the CPE WAN interface
>    - v4 configuration for lightweight 4over6 softwire
>
>
> For the last item, each subscribed user receives option 96 with unique
> option content (v4 address, v6 tunnel endpoint hint).
>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
>
> On 20. Nov 2020, at 09:37, Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> While designing the DHCP options to configure the HNA we asked ourselves
> how likely ISP are:
>
> A) How an ISP is likely to perform an action that is user specific based
> on a DHCP request. In our case the HNA sends to the DHCP server the
> certificate it will use to authenticate itself to a server the ISP has
> control on. The action is that the ISP will need to provision the server
> with that certificate.
>
> B) How an ISP is likely to provide a DHCP response that is specific to an
> individual user. The specific information is typically expected to be
> something provisioned for that user.
>
> Yours,
> Daniel
>
> --
> Daniel Migault
> Ericsson
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>
>
>

-- 
Daniel Migault
Ericsson