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

JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> Mon, 23 August 2004 09:49 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 FAA24806; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 05:49:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzBE1-0003t8-Hr; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 05:34:49 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BzB7B-0002zE-EW for dhcwg@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 05:27:45 -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 FAA23853 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 05:27:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp ([202.249.10.124]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BzB7N-0000Te-05 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 05:27:58 -0400
Received: from ocean.jinmei.org (unknown [2001:200:0:8002:d496:d9ca:8037:c688]) by shuttle.wide.toshiba.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C24491525D for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:27:37 +0900 (JST)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:27:37 +0900
Message-ID: <y7vd61iqk52.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Re: one more comment about the lifetime option
In-Reply-To: <y7vn01ax2d4.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
References: <y7vacxc5f3r.wl@ocean.jinmei.org> <20040803171447.GA27805@sverresborg.uninett.no> <4.3.2.7.2.20040803135851.02af6cb0@flask.cisco.com> <y7vn01ax2d4.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
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: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007
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, 05 Aug 2004 02:03:03 +0900, 
>>>>> JINMEI Tatuya <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> said:

>> I agree with Stig - we've discussed this issue before and come to the 
>> conclusion that there is little extra overhead in delivering information 
>> that has not changed, so there should be a single lifetime - chosen to be 
>> the shortest lifetome of any of the client's parameters.

> Okay, I'm fine with the "singe lifetime for all option parameters"
> approach.  In fact, I was just wondering without any particular
> preference.

> But I want the document to be more specific on this point because
> other readers might wonder the same point.

We should also restrict the position where the lifetime option can
appear: it should only be able to appear at the "top level" of option
hierarchy.  In other wise, it must not appear as a sub-option of
another option.

					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