Re: [dhcwg] comments on draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-01

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Wed, 05 March 2014 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 729DA1A06E5 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 08:21:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2DVrJx3O77Vp for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 08:21:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8FB1A01BF for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 08:21:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B2941B8175 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 08:21:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B00F190043; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 08:21:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-a1d7.meeting.ietf.org (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 08:21:35 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <86ppm0n0ga.fsf@strotmann.de>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 16:21:31 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <FD17AB28-ED7A-4FB0-B26D-9334EFB7BC75@nominum.com>
References: <86r46gn0zw.fsf@strotmann.de> <86ppm0n0ga.fsf@strotmann.de>
To: Carsten Strotmann <carsten@strotmann.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/J-EemdENlFMu7NfCdU-FSPb7pX0
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] comments on draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-01
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 16:21:43 -0000

On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:12 PM, Carsten Strotmann <carsten@strotmann.de>; wrote:
> maybe replace "separate server" in this sentence with "separate host",
> as a relay is not necessary a "server" (could be just any node in the
> local link).

Probably you mean "node," not "host," but otherwise I think this is a good suggestion.

> Might be just a matter of taste, but "all/every" and "commercial" seem
> to be overly specific. "modern DHCP server(s)" might be more general for
> the document.

The text actually also turns out not to be true, so it might be better to say "some" rather than "all" in any case.

> To bridge the language gap between both camps reading this BCP, it might be
> useful to define both terms in section "2.  Terminology".

Definitely.