[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication

To: Alper Yegin <alper.yegin at yegin.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication
From: Richard Pruss <ric at cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 11:50:24 +1000
Authentication-results: hkg-dkim-2; header.From=ric@cisco.com; dkim=pass (si g from cisco.com/hkgdkim2001 verified; );
Cc: dhcwg at ietf.org, int-area at ietf.org
Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=742; t=1194313874; x=1195177874; c=relaxed/simple; s=hkgdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=ric@cisco.com; z=From:=20Richard=20Pruss=20<ric@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[dhcwg]=20Discussion=20of=20dhc=20WG=20rechartering=2 0for=20DHCP=20authentication |Sender:=20; bh=Hjq2o1zJ8SqpBQyd7fQhuDN2UxdSIpp58AJCavwPe7s=; b=Mv9v/JLAYYXKYgcMmJS0vNYfAzSk52Jy8ld2spB29buGjXq1hJgNDY2lQnB/yQRPcAnPrzue yr1Iib7UG8RQHC5r3h4YHYNWbys8JY3NsCyfPc0S3AON+kub0WjxtG7cK+XiKRo2MpG6mRYOmt s5PwnESGsKdFerYzHoVBv3Kno=;
In-reply-to: <0MKpCa-1Ip7Tp4AID-0008VV@mrelay.perfora.net>
List-help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: Cisco Systems
References: <0MKpCa-1Ip7Tp4AID-0008VV@mrelay.perfora.net>
Reply-to: ric at cisco.com
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061025 Thunderbird/1.5.0.8 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0

Should this conversation not move to the int-area?

Alper Yegin wrote, around 6/11/07 5:19 AM:

1. CPE configures a pre-PANA IP address using DHCP 2. CPE runs PANA 3. CPE configures "session IP address" using DHCP

The PANA idea if using short lease/long lease DHCP address switching in DSL deployments is simply not feasible. BRAS's with over 60K subscribers are common and many providers have central city pops of more than a million subscribers.

During a pop restart the 60 second lease on a million subscribers would at best result in a sustained load of more than 16000 DHCP requests / second smashing through the relays and into the DHCP servers until the users had gradually authenticated.

- Ric

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication
  - From: Ralph Droms

References:
- RE: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication
  - From: Alper Yegin

Prev by Date: RE: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication
Next by Date: Re: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication
Previous by thread: RE: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication
Next by thread: Re: [dhcwg] Discussion of dhc WG rechartering for DHCP authentication
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread