[dhcwg] RE: SLPv2 DHCPv6 options (was: additional option for dhcpv6)

Erik--

Thanks for the clarification!

--Barr

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erik Guttman 
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 09:54
> 
> I can briefly clarify the SLP DHC options.  These are being
> revised from RFC 2610 in draft-guttman-svrloc-rfc2610bis-01.txt
> I will add text to specify DHCPv6 options in the next revision.
> 
[Snip!]
> 
> Please note that it is possible for the DA option to be sent 
> without sending the SLP scope option.  When an SLP agent is 
> configured with the DA option, it will request a SLPv2 DAAdvert 
> from the DA whose address is listed, in order to obtain information 
> about the DA, including which scopes the DA is configured with.
> This is described in detail in draft-guttman-svrloc-rfc2608bis-02.txt
> 
> The analogy to v4 option 78, SLP Directory Agent Option, will be 
> 
>     0                   1                   2                   3
>     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>    |         OPTION_SLPDA          |             option-len        |
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>    |                                                               |
>    |                                                               |
>    |                          DA Address #1                        |
>    |                                                               |
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>                                 . . . .
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>    |                                                               |
>    |                                                               |
>    |                          DA Address #N                        |
>    |                                                               |
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> 
> One or more DA addresses are supplied.  The minimum length of the 
> option will be 36 bytes.  The interpretation of this is field is
> exactly the same as for option 78, except that it is used to 
> configure a SLP v2 agent with the IPv6 address of a SLPv2 DA.
>    
[Snip!]
> 
> Only one SLP Service Scope Option is sent to configure an SLP
> agent.
> 
> The analogy to v4 option 79, SLP Service Scope Option, will be 
> 
>     0                   1                   2                   3
>     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>    |        OPTION_SLPSCOPES       |          option-len           |
>    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>    | <Scope List> ...
>    +--------------------
> 
> This option includes zero or more bytes of UTF-8 string.  Its 
> minimum length is 4 bytes.  The interpretation of this field
> is exactly as per DHCP option 79.
> 
> I have no doubt that these options will eventually assigned 
> DHCPv6 option IDs as the rfc2610bis document proceeds.
> 

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