[dhcwg] DHCP & option 43 and option 55 (RFC 2132)
Girgis George <George.Girgis@btcellnet.net> Thu, 14 February 2002 09:33 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 EAA14090 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 04:33:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id EAA18421 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 04:33:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA15316; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 03:26:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA15293 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 03:26:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from cellgate.btcellnet.net (cellgate.btcellnet.net [158.230.100.102]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id DAA13263 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 03:25:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from brwmsw03.cellnet.co.uk by cellgate.btcellnet.net via smtpd (for odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) with SMTP; 14 Feb 2002 08:26:38 UT
Received: from marie.btm.bt.co.uk (unverified) by brwmsw03.btcellnet.net (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.10) with ESMTP id <T591027c785ac113c5e3c8@brwmsw03.btcellnet.net> for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:25:31 +0000
Received: by marie.cellnet.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <15AWW7AF>; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:25:59 -0000
Message-ID: <9CBA35009A10D61192500040A5B1C8AA011DF9C9@margo>
From: Girgis George <George.Girgis@btcellnet.net>
To: "'dhcwg@ietf.org'" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:25:58 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1B531.3AA102A0"
Subject: [dhcwg] DHCP & option 43 and option 55 (RFC 2132)
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
Hi, I need your help please Regarding RFC 2132 , option 55 (Parameter request list) and option 43 (vendor class identifier) Is there any relation between the length field for option 55 and option 43 ? Regards George Girgis Network Designer Data Network Design Team BTcellnet tel +44 (0) 1753 564780 fax +44 (0) 1753 564355 mob +44 (0) 7753 560776 ========================================================= This electronic message contains information from the mmO2 plc Group which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please notify us by telephone or email (to the numbers or address above) immediately. =========================================================
- [dhcwg] DHCP & option 43 and option 55 (RFC 2132) Girgis George
- Re: [dhcwg] DHCP & option 43 and option 55 (RFC 2… Thamer Al-Harbash
- Re: [dhcwg] DHCP & option 43 and option 55 (RFC 2… Ted Lemon