IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dhcwg] (no subject)

Theodore Vojnovich <tbvojnov@us.ibm.com> Tue, 23 November 2004 03:46 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 WAA08147; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:46:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CWRY6-0006St-Ff; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:41:02 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CWRUO-0005gO-51 for dhcwg@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:37:12 -0500
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 WAA07527 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:37:07 -0500 (EST)
Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CWRXu-0006xE-LW for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:40:52 -0500
Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e32.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id iAN3aWFJ172774 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:36:32 -0500
Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id iAN3aWhv041292 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:36:32 -0700
Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAN3aWNW004024 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:36:32 -0700
Received: from d03nm690.boulder.ibm.com (d03nm690.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.59]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAN3aWIR004021 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:36:32 -0700
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0.2CF1 June 9, 2003
From: Theodore Vojnovich <tbvojnov@us.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <OF6CB57CA3.26395593-ON85256F55.0012E88B-85256F55.0013D14C@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:36:27 -0500
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM690/03/M/IBM(Release 6.53HF56 | October 29, 2004) at 11/22/2004 20:36:32, Serialize complete at 11/22/2004 20:36:32
X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17
Subject: [dhcwg] (no subject)
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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1154062383=="
Sender: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

Does rfc 3942 affect the usage of vendor specific options (vendor class 
identifier option 60 or client identifier option 61).  Specifically,
in the response to option 60 (option 43)  still have "sub" options in the 
200s...or....do we need to get some sort of IANA position on the use
of vendor options inside 60/43?

Thanks

Ted Vojnovich

Email:  tbvojnov@us.ibm.com

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email