<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;" dir="ltr">
<p>We're evaluating KEA (version 1.2.0) as our DHCP platform moving forward. In my testing with our Docsis/HFC network, I am not able to have a docsis modem respond to a DHCPOFFER message from KEA. I can get the same modem to respond to a similarly formatted
DHCPOFFER from ISC DHCP.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Looking at the tcpdump output from the server, the only difference that stands out is the Client-ID (option 61). While, in both cases, the docsis modem does supply the Client-ID in the DHCPDISCOVER packet, the KEA server DOES include the Client-ID in the
resulting DHCPOFFER where the ISC DHCP server DOES NOT include the Client-ID in it's DHCPOFFER.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif, Helvetica, EmojiFont, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">(Interesting note: RFC </span><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif, Helvetica, EmojiFont, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">2131
(Draft Standard) states</span><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif, Helvetica, EmojiFont, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;"> that the server "MUST
NOT" include the Client-ID in the DHCPOFFER. At the same time, RFC </span><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif, Helvetica, EmojiFont, 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', NotoColorEmoji, 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Android Emoji', EmojiSymbols; font-size: 16px;">6842
(Proposed Standard) indicates the server MUST include the Client-ID IF the client provided it in the DHCPDISCOVER.)</span><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I need to determine why the KEA offer is not 'working'. Admittedly, I do not know for certain that the Client-ID is the root of my problem. I think the next step is to somehow prove that success or failure does indeed hinge on the inclusion of the Client-ID
field in the DHCPOFFER. I'm at somewhat of an impasse, as I cannot figure out how to tell KEA to NOT include the option. (At the same time, I cannot figure out how to tell ISC DHCP to include the option - though this is off topic for the Kea-users list.)</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Does anyone have any insight into a configuration option to disable option 61? Is there a generic way to disable a certain option via the kea.conf file? Or, where in the code can I 'flip the switch' the turn option 61 off on an offer?</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Thanks in advance,</p>
<p>Duane</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>