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 <ianfar...@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.i...@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
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
