[dhcwg] Edit #1 of DHCPv6 spec (corrected)
Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Tue, 14 May 2002 20:04 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA03859 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2002 16:04:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id QAA18730 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 14 May 2002 16:04:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA18236; Tue, 14 May 2002 16:02:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA18211 for <dhcwg@ns.ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2002 16:02:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA03745 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2002 16:01:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from funnel.cisco.com (funnel.cisco.com [161.44.168.79]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g4EK1dHt023356 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2002 13:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 16:01:39 -0400
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0205141558280.28862-100000@funnel.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Subject: [dhcwg] Edit #1 of DHCPv6 spec (corrected)
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
I am updating draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-24.txt, following up on Thomas
Narten's recent comments. Here's the first of those updates
(corrected; Josh Littlefield pointed out the example needs a trailing null
octet.):
Narten: The document makes references to DNS names in two places:
> 9.3. Vendor-assigned unique ID based on Domain Name (VUID-DN)
>
> The vendor-assigned unique ID based on the domain name consists of a
> two-octet value giving the length of the identifier, the value of the
> identifier and the vendor's registered domain name.
I don't think VUID-DN format is needed and would suggest simply
removing it.
The authors decided to retain the VUID-DN format and correct the text in
section 9.3 to reflect the representation of DNS names
specified in section 8.
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| 0 | 2 | 0 | 8 | 12|192|132|221|
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
! | 3 | 0 | 9 | 18| 7 |101|120| 97|
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
! |109|112|108|101| 3 | 99|111|109|
! +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
! | 0 |
! +---+
This example includes the two-octet type of 2, the two-octet length
of 8, eight octets of identifier data, followed by "example.com"
! represented as described in section 8.
!
!
--- 1258,1279 ----
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| 0 | 2 | 0 | 8 | 12|192|132|221|
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
! | 3 | 0 | 9 | 18|101|120| 97|109|
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
! |112|108|101| 46| 99|111|109|
! +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
This example includes the two-octet type of 2, the two-octet length
of 8, eight octets of identifier data, followed by "example.com"
! represented in ASCII.
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] Edit #1 of DHCPv6 spec (corrected) Ralph Droms