[dhcwg] Re: Last call for <draft-ietf-dhc-csr-05.txt>

>If I change MUST NOT to SHOULD NOT, will this answer your objection?

In my original mail, I proposed text using the word "MAY". I still think 
that's the right wording.

I notice an amusing symmetry here:

I write a DHCP client, and would like it to request both options, but I 
expect server administrators will usually configure their servers to 
return only one or the other, as appropriate for the particular site.

Ted writes a DHCP server, and would like it to be configured with data 
for both options, but expects client administrators to configure their 
clients to only request one or the other, as appropriate for the 
particular site.

No editorial comment here. I'm just wondering if we're both looking at 
the same problem from opposite sides, and each wanting the other side to 
be the one making the decision. (However, if we do pursue this line of 
reasoning, I'd argue that site-specific configuration belongs in the 
server, not the client.)

Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>
 * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer
 * Chairman, IETF ZEROCONF
 * www.stuartcheshire.org

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg