Re: [dhcwg] draft-dhankins-dhcp-option-guidelines-00

On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 11:29:25AM +0200, Stig Venaas wrote:
> Thanks for writing this, I think it is a very useful document. Some
> further guidelines should perhaps be added. One might be to discuss
> why option size is a big issue and suggest that people make options
> consume a minimal amount of space (e.g. not put XML into dhc, but
> rather a URL to a document...). Perhaps also suggest that new options
> should in general be requested by the client and only returned by
> server upon request?

Excellent points, I'll write something up on these two.

> I think we should put all the general considerations for designing
> new options into this document so that people specifying new options
> do it right. The syntax is not the only consideration.

I agree (syntax is just what my universe revolves around).  I'd
love more ideas to increase the laundry list.

There has also recently been lively exchange on ietf@, and one
thing that came up was about guidelines for when using DHCP at
all was a good or bad idea.

I suspect some abstract language to those ends should be included
as well, so I've added that to my list.

And thanks for the (prompt!) feedback, Stig.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.	-- Jack T. Hankins