IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: doubt about lease...

lowell@epilogue.com Mon, 22 April 1996 14:32 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11753; 22 Apr 96 10:32 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11749; 22 Apr 96 10:32 EDT
Received: from reef.bucknell.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08615; 22 Apr 96 10:32 EDT
Received: from localhost by reef.bucknell.edu with SMTP (5.65/IDA-1.2.8) id AA16048; Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:25:13 -0400
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:25:13 -0400
Message-Id: <9604220948.aa19865@kehleyr.epilogue.com>
Errors-To: droms@bucknell.edu
Reply-To: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Originator: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
X-Orig-Sender: dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu
Precedence: bulk
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: lowell@epilogue.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu>
Subject: Re: doubt about lease...
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Discussion of DHCP for IPv4

You ask whether a server should give out a remaining lease or the full
default length when it receives a new DHCPDISCOVER from a client with
an extant lease.

The answer, according to the DHCPDISCOVER discussion in the DHCP
server behaviour section of the spec, is that the server must use the
remaining portion of the existing lease.  I don't know why this is
specified: it seems to me that it falls on the policy side of
"mechanism, not policy," but that's the way it's written.  Clients
shouldn't know the difference anyway.

Be well.
        Lowell Gilbert

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email