Re: Minimum length of DHCP packet ?

Eric Weber <weber@tungsten.seattle.geoworks.com> Fri, 08 March 1996 17:35 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15409; 8 Mar 96 12:35 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15405; 8 Mar 96 12:35 EST
Received: from coral.bucknell.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10133; 8 Mar 96 12:35 EST
Received: from charcoal-gw.eg.bucknell.edu by coral.bucknell.edu; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/29Aug94-0956AM) id AA24770; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 12:25:00 -0500
Received: from reef.bucknell.edu by charcoal (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA04967; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 12:17:23 -0500
Received: from fusion.geoworks.com by reef.bucknell.edu with SMTP (5.65/IDA-1.2.8) id AA17438; Fri, 8 Mar 1996 12:17:15 -0500
Received: from tungsten.seattle.geoworks.com by geoworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA06675; Fri, 8 Mar 96 09:15:49 PST
Received: from astatine.seattle.geoworks.com.seattle by tungsten.seattle.geoworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA09240; Fri, 8 Mar 96 09:10:43 PST
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 96 09:10:43 PST
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Eric Weber <weber@tungsten.seattle.geoworks.com>
Message-Id: <9603081710.AA09240@tungsten.seattle.geoworks.com>
To: Mike Carney - Sun BOS Software <Mike.Carney@east.sun.com>
Cc: tomy@sfc.wide.ad.jp, dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Subject: Re: Minimum length of DHCP packet ?
In-Reply-To: <9603081702.AA05545@poori.East.Sun.COM>
References: <9603081702.AA05545@poori.East.Sun.COM>

I did say that the client should send out at least 300 bytes to ensure
that finicky relay agents don't dump it.  I just don't see any reason
why the relay agent or server should dump _incoming_ packets because
of the packet size being small.

If I'm missing something, please let me know.  What is the advantage
of refusing to accept an otherwise valid DHCP or BOOTP message if it
is smaller than 300 bytes?  In other words, why was the 300 byte
requirement put into the RFC in the first place?

-- Eric Weber
   weber@geoworks.com