IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-proxyserver-opt-00

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Tue, 20 April 2004 17:14 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05126 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 13:14:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BFyU2-0007hc-6k for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:52:30 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i3KGqUw3029601 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:52:30 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BFyGD-0000kZ-I1 for dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:38:13 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA01848 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:38:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BFyGC-0000wT-0Z for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:38:12 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BFyF9-0000d7-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:37:08 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BFyE4-0000Ab-00 for dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:36:00 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BFxhD-0008Tm-SQ; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 12:02:03 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BFx6X-0001qX-Tc for dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:24:09 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA25091 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:24:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BFx6X-00018h-07 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:24:09 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BFx5T-0000pf-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:23:04 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com ([171.68.10.86]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BFx4P-0000JP-00 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:21:57 -0400
Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i3KFLOhE018202 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 08:21:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rdroms-w2k01.cisco.com (che-vpn-cluster-1-104.cisco.com [10.86.240.104]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AHS56324; Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:21:23 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20040420111554.01f9f660@flask.cisco.com>
X-Sender: rdroms@flask.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:19:52 -0400
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-proxyserver-opt-00
In-Reply-To: <F27D736F-88BC-11D8-B6D7-000A95D9C74C@fugue.com>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20040403072041.029964c8@flask.cisco.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20040403072041.029964c8@flask.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
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>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,OPT_HEADER autolearn=no version=2.60

Ted and I both made the same suggestion about carrying a list of servers in
one instance of the suboption, rather than multiple instances of the same
suboption each carrying one server.  Is this change acceptable to the WG
(please respond yes or no)?

- Ralph

At 12:56 PM 4/7/2004 -0500, Ted Lemon wrote:
>I have a bunch of suggested changes to this draft, which fall into three 
>categories:
>
>1. A single change to the protocol itself.
>2. Editorial changes - I think there was some extra text in this draft 
>explaining proxy servers that isn't needed, and generate questions during 
>the IESG review, so I'm suggesting that it be deleted.
>3. Copyediting.   There were some minor spelling and grammatical errors.
>
>The change to the protocol is that it currently specifies an encapsulation 
>of suboptions, like option 82, but allows for the appearance of multiple 
>suboptions, which is different than the behavior specified for handling 
>options in RFC3396.   This is not a huge problem, but it probably requires 
>additional code in DHCP servers and clients that isn't necessary, so I'd 
>suggest changing it so that if you want to specify multiple proxy servers 
>for the same protocol, you should just list more than one IP address/port 
>tuple in the suboption for that protocol.
>
>I've enclosed a diff for all the changes.
>
>
>


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email