<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Michael Brown <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mbrown@fensystems.co.uk">mbrown@fensystems.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Saturday 17 Jul 2010 13:21:07 Jarrod Johnson wrote:<br>
> My proposal to I've submitted to the IETF, MS, and Intel is to have x86<br>
> standardize on an as-yet unapproved DUID type, that uses 'the' UUID already<br>
> ubiquitous in x86 firmware (dmidecode|grep UUID: will show it in linux and<br>
> wmic csproduct will show it in Windows (the latter is a tad byteswapped in<br>
> output)). DHCPv6 aims for a host identifier rather than an interface<br>
> identifier, and I think this is the "cheapest", most approriate approach in<br>
> x86 space.<br>
<br>
</div>Is this the same UUID that we currently send within DHCPv4 option 97 (i.e. the<br>
UUID as extracted from the SMBIOS "system information" structure)?<br>
<br>
If so, then it's already accessible via &uuid_setting, so would be easy to<br>
support.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Michael<br>
</font></blockquote></div>It would be.