Server NAKs

"Michael J. Lewis" <hosmjl@chevron.com> Tue, 11 June 1996 16:47 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19170; 11 Jun 96 12:47 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19166; 11 Jun 96 12:47 EDT
Received: from reef.bucknell.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13716; 11 Jun 96 12:47 EDT
Received: from localhost by reef.bucknell.edu with SMTP (5.65/IDA-1.2.8) id AA15042; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:40:05 -0400
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:40:05 -0400
Message-Id: <31BD9A22.1993@chevron.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: "Michael J. Lewis" <hosmjl@chevron.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <dhcp-v4@bucknell.edu>
Subject: Server NAKs
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Discussion of DHCP for IPv4
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)

Question:  Should a server on subnet "A" that is servicing another 
subnet "B" NAK invalid requests on subnet "A"?  

We have a subnet 192 on which there are two DHCP servers.  One services 
the 192 subnet and the other  another external subnet 12.  The second 
server, which has no definition of the 192 subnet in its tables, issues 
NAKs whenever it detected an improper address for the 192 subnet.

This seems to conform to the RFC but I wanted to verify with the working 
group.