IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-netboot-05

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Tue, 06 October 2009 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D648A28C1CA for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:25:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.245
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.245 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.354, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MYOF2qknZlJo for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:25:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og107.obsmtp.com (exprod7og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.167]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589A128C17B for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:24:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob107.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKSsuZ4xed+lDYt/whBezx0dX844bv+M/n@postini.com; Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:26:38 PDT
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (webmail.nominum.com [64.89.228.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "webmail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D87A1B82FA; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vpna-148.vpn.nominum.com (64.89.227.148) by exchange-01.win.nominum.com (64.89.228.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:26:25 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1076)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <200910061918.n96JI5Nv005405@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:26:22 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <D4C9A450-68AD-45E2-AED4-189051D48D05@nominum.com>
References: <994ABFCB-3ABF-484C-9855-1EEACC663CF4@nominum.com> <200910061918.n96JI5Nv005405@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1076)
Cc: DHC-WG WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>, Damien Neil <Damien.Neil@nominum.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Comments on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-netboot-05
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:25:00 -0000

On Oct 6, 2009, at 12:18 PM, Thomas Narten wrote:
> Would a resonable criteria be that multiple options are OK if you can
> process them in whatever order you find them easily, without having to
> go through the entire message and find other related options that must
> be processed together?

I'm a little puzzled by this particular concern.   Why is it a problem  
that you have to "go through the entire message" to find multiple  
instances of a particular option?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email