[dhcwg] comments on draft-daniel-dhc-dhcpv4-tep-conf

This draft breaks a couple of existing assumptions about DHCP.   First, 
it requires that the option be send only in a DHCPACK message in 
response to a DHCPREQUEST message.   Normally the DHCPOFFER message 
contains the same options as the DHCPACK message.   So I would strongly 
suggest that this restriction be relaxed to allow the DHCPOFFER to 
contain this option.

Secondly, the draft allows multiple copies to appear.   This 
contradicts the Encoding Long Options RFC (sorry, can't remember the 
number off the top of my head), which would create a huge headache for 
DHCP server and client implementations.   So please change the option 
so that there can be only one of them, and that if multiple values need 
to be sent, that is encoded within the option.

Also, there is quite a bit of information in this document that goes 
beyond describing the format of the option.   It looks like you're 
defining a new protocol.   If you are not defining a new protocol, it 
would be better to refer to the document that defines the protocol, and 
remove the words from this document that describe that protocol in 
detail.   If you are defining a new protocol here, this draft probably 
needs to be reviewed by the working group responsible for that area as 
well as by the DHC working group.  (sorry if this has already been 
said)

I've enclosed a couple of diffs for some minor editorial suggestions.

[dhcwg] comments on draft-daniel-dhc-dhcpv4-tep-conf

Attachment: draft-daniel-dhc-dhcpv4-tep-conf-comments