Re: [dhcwg] Re: one more comment about the lifetime option

JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> Fri, 03 September 2004 06:50 UTC

Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA02118; Fri, 3 Sep 2004 02:50:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C37pi-0004wi-N9; Fri, 03 Sep 2004 02:46:02 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C37fD-0000yh-Qz for dhcwg@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2004 02:35:12 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00904 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Sep 2004 02:35:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp ([202.249.10.124]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C37hl-00021s-1o for dhcwg@ietf.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2004 02:37:50 -0400
Received: from ocean.jinmei.org (unknown [2001:200:0:8002:7036:3eab:f2f4:3846]) by shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B5C81525D; Fri, 3 Sep 2004 15:35:09 +0900 (JST)
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 15:35:10 +0900
Message-ID: <y7vacw75081.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
To: "Bernie Volz" <volz@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Re: one more comment about the lifetime option
In-Reply-To: <000701c490ea$db453770$6501a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
References: <y7vy8jt3u2u.wl@ocean.jinmei.org> <000701c490ea$db453770$6501a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.10.1 (Watching The Wheels) Emacs/21.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
Organization: Research & Development Center, Toshiba Corp., Kawasaki, Japan.
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.5 - "Awara-Onsen")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org, "'Ted Lemon'" <mellon@nominum.com>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Sender: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

>>>>> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:46:24 -0400, 
>>>>> "Bernie Volz" <volz@cisco.com> said:

>> An authentication 
>> option can be used with Information-request and can have sub-options.

> That's news to me and I don't see where this is possible based on RFC 3315.

Ah, okay, I was wrong.  The authentication option is a variable-length
option but does not take a sub-option according to RFC3315.

> But in any case, its no big deal to specify that the option is restricted to
> the message level.

That's correct.  But at the same time, I believe we all agree that
there is no reason to allow the lifetime (or refresh timer) option
appearing as a sub-option.

We can prefer the former logic for the reason not to specify this
point in the document.  We can also prefer the latter logic for the
reason to specify this point in the document.  I believe this is a
matter of taste, and I myself can live with either approach.  So, I'd
leave the decision to the document author.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp

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