Re: [dhcwg] Length of Reconf_Msg option

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Tue, 28 May 2002 13:11 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 JAA17062 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2002 09:11:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id JAA10656 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 28 May 2002 09:12:04 -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 JAA10387; Tue, 28 May 2002 09:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA10364 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2002 09:10:20 -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 JAA17009 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 May 2002 09:09:55 -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 g4SD9lHt004823; Tue, 28 May 2002 06:09:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 09:09:47 -0400
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
To: SHIRASAKI Yasuhiro <y.shirasaki@ntt.com>
cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Length of Reconf_Msg option
In-Reply-To: <20020528.215245.123116881.yasuhiro@ntt.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0205280909180.8983-100000@funnel.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
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

Thanks for catching that oversight.  I'll fix it right away.

- Ralph

On Tue, 28 May 2002, SHIRASAKI Yasuhiro wrote:

> The figure for a Reconfigure Message option is still broken
> in the -25 draft.
>
> --
> SHIRASAKI Yasuhiro @ NTT Communications
>
> > I'll make this fix in the next rev of the draft...
> >
> > - Ralph
> >
> > At 06:26 PM 4/25/2002 -0500, Bernie Volz (EUD) wrote:
> >
> > >Yeah, this needs to be fixed. I'm also hoping we can change this slightly
> > >- to change the msg-type to use the DHCPv6 message type numbers (in 25.3).
> > >A revised version might be:
> > >
> > >22.20. Reconfigure Message option
> > >
> > >    A server includes a Reconfigure Message option in a Reconfigure
> > >    message to indicate to the client whether the client responds with a
> > >    Renew message or an Information-request message.
> > >
> > >     0                   1                   2                   3
> > >     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> > >    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > >    |      OPTION_RECONF_MSG        |         option-len            |
> > >    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > >    |   msg-type    |
> > >    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> > >
> > >
> > >       option-code          OPTION_RECONF_MSG (19)
> > >
> > >       option-len           1
> > >
> > >       msg-type             5 for Renew message, 11 for
> > >                            Information-request message
>
>


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