Le mercredi 31 juillet 2019 à 17:00 -0400, Michael Richardson a écrit :
> Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> >> It probably occurs less in places like airports, hotels and
> >> enterprises where there is more local operational clue.
>
> > In entrerprises the dhcp layer is mostly owned by deskto
Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>> It probably occurs less in places like airports, hotels and
>> enterprises where there is more local operational clue.
> In entrerprises the dhcp layer is mostly owned by desktop IT (ADs, in
> the hands of people still stuggling to come to terms with the
Le mercredi 31 juillet 2019 à 12:29 -0400, Michael Richardson a écrit :
> Chris Spencer wrote:
> > Would not a feed of option 82 rather than create a new API
> work? option
> > 82 can carry MAC/IP (it could create a GUID/UUID) and other
> location
> > identifiers? if the external porta
{trying to get this into it's own thread}
Remi NGUYEN VAN wrote:
> I think we can either try to solve this problem by having the client
> send an identifier to the API, or state that the API needs to be hosted
> inside the network.
> If we go with option 2, I'm afraid many v
Chris Spencer wrote:
> Would not a feed of option 82 rather than create a new API work? option
> 82 can carry MAC/IP (it could create a GUID/UUID) and other location
> identifiers? if the external portal could get a feed of this, the
> portal at layer 3 could look up the device MA
