Re: [dhcwg] unresolved comments in dhcpv6-25

>>>>> On Wed, 05 Jun 2002 00:34:52 -0400, 
>>>>> Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> said:

> Responses to your other comments:
>    15. What if a client receives a reconfigure message but none of the
>        configuration information was provided by the server (that sends
>        the reconfigure)?  What if only a part of the configuration
>        information was provided by the server?  Section 19.3.1 is not
>        clear (enough) about the cases.

> Are you asking what the client should do if the server's Reply message
> doesn't include all the configuration information specified by the
> client in the Request or Information-request message?

Sorry, perhaps I was just confused when writing the question.  Please
forget it.  BTW, the first sentence of 19.3.1 seems to have a typo:

   Upon receipt of a valid Reconfigure message, the client initiates a
   transaction with the server by sending a Reply or Information-request
   message.

Shouldn't the "Reply" be "Renew"?  (this may have been fixed in the
local copy of the latest revision).

>    What should the receiving node do if this condition is broken?  (This
>    question should be extended in a general form; "what should the
>    receiving node do if an option is included in a message in which the
>    option MUST NOT be appeared?")

> In general, the decision about how to proceed with messages that don't
> adhere to the rules about option inclusion - for example, if the
> message includes more than one Vendor-specific Information option with
> the same Enterprise number - is a policy decision for the DHCP
> server.

Okay, if this is noted in the draft explicitly, I'm fine with it.

					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