Thanks - these responses point out very clearly that the mechanism is being
used as described, *except* for the bit that's contentious (use of MD5 for
information hiding).
This means that we will not have a backwards compatibility issue with the
installed base if we change the format of the record, but *will* have a
procedural compatibility issue if we don't keep the property of "you can
know the expected content of the record without fetching it".
Harald
--On mandag, november 28, 2005 17:20:09 -0500 "Bernie Volz (volz)"
<volz(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
Harald:
Yes, I can.
The ISC's DHCP server (www.isc.org) does this (I'm not sure whether it
uses MD5 to encode the client identity or not). Ted might know for sure.
As does Cisco's Network Registrar (though it presently doesn't encode
the data using MD5).
And, I'm pretty sure several other DHCP vendors do this -- though
whether they're using MD5 or not I can't be sure.
These servers are in production all over and have been doing this for
many years.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf