Re: [dhcwg] Dual-stack hosts using DHCP as dhc WG charter item

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 15 March 2004 22:38 UTC

In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20040315161655.028ffcf8@flask.cisco.com>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20040315161655.028ffcf8@flask.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <5D9A3DC6-76D0-11D8-8D56-000A95D9C74C@fugue.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Dual-stack hosts using DHCP as dhc WG charter item
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 16:30:30 -0600
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Isn't the problem with the nis draft a question of whether it really 
needs that section that says in what packet types the option is 
allowed?

Personally, I think we should advance the drafts unchanged - I don't 
see how a solution to the dual-stack issue is going to work if it 
requires that all the existing option drafts be changed, and 
furthermore I don't really see a reason why we'd do it that way even if 
it were an option.

I think it might be worth discussing whether or not there's a better 
way to handle the "this option allowed in packets of type X" 
boilerplate, though, without holding this draft hostage to the 
discussion.


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

[dhcwg] Dual-stack hosts using DHCP as dhc WG cha… Ralph Droms
Re: [dhcwg] Dual-stack hosts using DHCP as dhc WG… Ted Lemon
Re: [dhcwg] Dual-stack hosts using DHCP as dhc WG… Ralph Droms
Re: [dhcwg] Dual-stack hosts using DHCP as dhc WG… Ted Lemon