Re: [dhcwg] DHCP Option 33
Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 07 March 2003 18:52 UTC
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22747; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:52:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h27J3wO26597; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 14:03:58 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h27J2rO26513 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 14:02:53 -0500
Received: from toccata.fugue.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22585 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 13:50:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from nominum.com (dsl093-187-232.chi2.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.187.232]) by toccata.fugue.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D121B21AA; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 12:48:27 -0600 (CST)
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 12:52:45 -0600
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] DHCP Option 33
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551)
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
To: Ed Sawicki <ed@alcpress.com>
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <1047061386.1896.657.camel@red>
Message-Id: <FBDB9D5A-50CD-11D7-93FC-00039367340A@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> I'm wondering why DHCP Option 33 (Static Route) does not > provide for the sending of a subnet mask along with the > destination address. > You want the classless static route option, which has its own rfc. The static routes option predates deployment of classless subnetting on the Internet. :'} _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list dhcwg@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] DHCP Option 33 Ed Sawicki
- Re: [dhcwg] DHCP Option 33 Ted Lemon