Hi Rob, Thank you for the info. I think this would work although our customer we are integrating a solution for claims that his requires option 125 specifically. I'm not sure that is necessarily true but that is what he is claiming based on his previous server setup. If I can't figure out how to get the vendor identifying options working I will get them to test out option 43 as you configure it above.
I'm curious if there is a way to get option 125 working to encapsulate the right vendor ID with the options included. From the docs I believe Kea allows it and I think I have it configured correctly above but it's only sending out an empty option. Thanks again, Evan On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 10:23 AM Sutherland, Rob < [email protected]> wrote: > Here’s what worked for my Mitel phones (note that I used option 43): > > > > "client-classes": [ > > { > > "name": "mitel", > > "test": "substring(option[60].hex,0,17) == 'ipphone.mitel.com'", > > "option-def": [ > > { > > "name": "vendor-encapsulated-options", > > "code": 43, > > "type": "string" > > } > > ], > > "option-data": [ > > { > > "name": "vendor-encapsulated-options", > > "data": "id:ipphone.mitel.com > ;sw_tftp=10.151.75.34;call_srv=10.151.75.32" > > } > > ] > > }, > > > > *From:* Kea-users <[email protected]> * On Behalf Of *Evan > Carson > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 6, 2019 4:00 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [Kea-users] Vendor-Identifying option 125 vivso-suboptions > > > > Hello, > > > > We are running Kea 1.4.0 and are having trouble getting the server to hand > out option 125 to a Mitel phone. The Kea server is replying to the client > with this data in the DHCP offer with an empty option 125 containing only > the Mitel enterprise option but no data. > > > > We have this option definition specified in the Dhcp4 config: > > "option-def": [ > { > "array": false, > "code": 130, > "encapsulate": "", > "name": "mitel-option", > "record-types": "", > "space": "vendor-1027", > "type": "string" > } > ], > > > > We then placed this option in the subnet["pools"]["option-data"] for our > phone subnet > > { > "name": "vivso-suboptions", > "data": "1027" > }, > { > "name": "mitel-option", > "space": "vendor-1027", > "data": "id:ipphone.mitel.com > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fipphone.mitel.com&data=02%7C01%7CRobert.B.Sutherland%40windstream.com%7Cfe63ef71459047eeb95b08d762fc465b%7C2567b4c1b0ed40f5aee358d7c5f3e2b2%7C1%7C1%7C637086707970887653&sdata=ybRRfpPu13cnOyzXLUV2ojFqrTIFjusuUu%2BijhCjs1s%3D&reserved=0> > ;sw_tftp=10.78.182.2;call_srv=10.78.182.2;vlan=71;l2p=6;dscp=46;" > } > > > > Here is the DHCP Offer pcap coming back from server: > > > > Frame 15952: 332 bytes on wire (2656 bits), 332 bytes captured (2656 bits) > Ethernet II, Src: RealtekU_e9:ea:63 (52:54:00:e9:ea:63), Dst: > SmcStand_9c:c6:36 (08:00:0f:9c:c6:36) > Internet Protocol Version 4, Src: 192.168.1.1, Dst: 255.255.255.255 > User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: 67, Dst Port: 68 > Bootstrap Protocol (Offer) > Message type: Boot Reply (2) > Hardware type: Ethernet (0x01) > Hardware address length: 6 > Hops: 0 > Transaction ID: 0x99cc086f > Seconds elapsed: 0 > Bootp flags: 0x8000, Broadcast flag (Broadcast) > Client IP address: 0.0.0.0 > Your (client) IP address: 192.168.1.102 > Next server IP address: 0.0.0.0 > Relay agent IP address: 0.0.0.0 > Client MAC address: SmcStand_9c:c6:36 (08:00:0f:9c:c6:36) > Client hardware address padding: 00000000000000000000 > Server host name: KVM_128T_Remote > Boot file name not given > Magic cookie: DHCP > Option: (1) Subnet Mask > Option: (3) Router > Option: (6) Domain Name Server > Option: (51) IP Address Lease Time > Option: (53) DHCP Message Type (Offer) > Option: (54) DHCP Server Identifier > Option: (61) Client identifier > Option: (125) V-I Vendor-specific Information > Length: 5 > Enterprise: Mitel, Corp. (1027) > Length: 0 > Option: (255) End > > It looks like the configuration for the enterprise ID is working correctly > however the custom "mitel-option" string doesn't seem to be contributing. > Is there anything wrong with the way we have this configured? > > > > We aren't using any client-class configuration to restrict this option to > only the clients requesting a given Vendor-Identifying Vendor Class option. > Is it a requirement that the client-classification be used to specify the > vendor class option? > > > > Thank you for your help, > > > > Evan Carson > > > > Sensitivity: Internal >
_______________________________________________ Kea-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
