Subject: UUID client ID

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 02:17:49 -0400 (EDT)

Hi,

>The authors of
>Authentication for DHCP Messages <draft-ietf-dhc-authentication-10.txt>
>(sect. 5.5.1) propose using a UUID type of client ID
><draft-henry-DHCP-opt61-UUID-type-00.txt> as a means for the client to ID
>itself to the DHCP service . 

It seems DHCP Authentication document does not mention a type of the 
Client ID.

draft-ietf-dhc-authentication-11.txt
:     1. The client MUST include the authentication request option in
:        its DHCPDISCOVER message along with option 61 [6] to identify
:        itself uniquely to the server.

Is it necessary to use UUID type for the authentication?
Os just an uniqueness is good enough?

Best Regards,

Kenji Fujisawa

---

From: "William A. Arbaugh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 23:10:57 -0400 (EDT)

Uniqueness is definitely a requirement. There probably needs to be some
discussion on how people feel on this issue.  I'd like to see something
like the UUID that provides some inter-domain uniqueness rather than every
domain using their own ID.  Doing so, however, raises some privacy issues.
How do people feel?

Bill

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 03:20:51 -0400 (EDT)

Hi,

Thank you for your reply.

>domain using their own ID.

It seems that the global 802 MAC address and EUI-64 are also useful
for the authentication.
Is this correct?

Kenji Fujisawa

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 09:04:18 -0400 (EDT)

> Doing so, however, raises some privacy issues.

Can you elaborate on this?   I don't see it.   A UUID is no more
exciting than an IP address, right?

			       _MelloN_

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 09:08:48 -0400 (EDT)

> It seems that the global 802 MAC address and EUI-64 are also useful

Do you mean as a global identifier, or as actual authentication?
They're probably useful as a global identifier, although 48 bits is
kind of small nowadays for a global identifier and will come to seem
even smaller as time goes by.

			       _MelloN_

---

From: "William A. Arbaugh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 09:52:46 -0400 (EDT)

> exciting than an IP address, right?
I think it's a bit stronger than an IP address, but essentially you are
correct. I thought several people at the Microsoft Authentication
workshop were concerned about global id's.  Perhaps I remember it
incorrectly, but I wanted it discussed on the list to ensure there weren't
any objections.

I personally prefer the UUID as I stated at the last meeting in Minn.

Bill

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:08:44 -0400 (EDT)

>Do you mean as a global identifier, or as actual authentication?

I meant an identifier in a client ID, similar to the use of UUID.

>even smaller as time goes by.

Anyway, Ethernet node will have a global 802 MAC address 
while Ethernet is used.
And I guess this is one reason why IEEE defined EUI-64 (64bit ID).

Kenji Fujisawa