RE: [dhcwg] Conflicting information regarding DHCP options 82 and 83.

"Kostur, Andre" <Andre@incognito.com> Wed, 09 October 2002 15:53 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA22891 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:53:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g99FtH431430 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:55:17 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g99FtHv31427 for <dhcwg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:55:17 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA22886 for <dhcwg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:53:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g99Fqgv31306; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:52:42 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g99Fpcv31222 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:51:38 -0400
Received: from chimera.incognito.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA22700 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:49:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from homerdmz.incognito.com ([207.102.214.106] helo=homer.incognito.com.) by chimera.incognito.com with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17zJ7e-0005z9-00; Wed, 09 Oct 2002 08:51:42 -0700
Received: by homer.incognito.com. with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <4249T0XD>; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:52:47 -0700
Message-ID: <4FB49E60CFBA724E88867317DAA3D198A67480@homer.incognito.com.>
From: "Kostur, Andre" <Andre@incognito.com>
To: "'Van Aken Dirk'" <VanAkenD@thmulti.com>, "'dhcwg@ietf.org'" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Cc: Dedecker Hans <DedeckerH@thmulti.com>, Dekeyser Miek <DekeyserM@thmulti.com>
Subject: RE: [dhcwg] Conflicting information regarding DHCP options 82 and 83.
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:52:43 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C26FAB.E77CC600"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
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>

I wonder if 83 was previously mentioned in a draft somewhere.  However, RFC
3046 is authoritative on this matter, and option 82 is the one to look at.
82 currently has 2 defined sub-options (and I know of 2 or 3 more that are
currently in draft)

-----Original Message-----
From: Van Aken Dirk [mailto:VanAkenD@thmulti.com]
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 1:27 AM
To: 'dhcwg@ietf.org'
Cc: Dedecker Hans; Dekeyser Miek
Subject: [dhcwg] Conflicting information regarding DHCP options 82 and
83.


Hello DHCP Working Group,

I have some conflicting information regarding the DHCP options defined
below. i.e. On the IANA bootp-dhcp parameter list (
http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-dhcp-parameters ) I see the following
options:

   82      Agent Circuit ID         N    Agent Circuit ID
   83      Agent Remote ID          N    Agent Remote ID

On the other hand RFC3046 mentions the following":

>>>>
2.0 Relay Agent Information Option

   This document defines a new DHCP Option called the Relay Agent
   Information Option.  It is a "container" option for specific agent-
   supplied sub-options.  The format of the Relay Agent Information
   option is:

          Code   Len     Agent Information Field
         +------+------+------+------+------+------+--...-+------+
         |  82  |   N  |  i1  |  i2  |  i3  |  i4  |      |  iN  |
         +------+------+------+------+------+------+--...-+------+

   The length N gives the total number of octets in the Agent
   Information Field.  The Agent Information field consists of a
   sequence of SubOpt/Length/Value tuples for each sub-option, encoded
   in the following manner:

          SubOpt  Len     Sub-option Value
         +------+------+------+------+------+------+--...-+------+
         |  1   |   N  |  s1  |  s2  |  s3  |  s4  |      |  sN  |
         +------+------+------+------+------+------+--...-+------+
          SubOpt  Len     Sub-option Value
         +------+------+------+------+------+------+--...-+------+
         |  2   |   N  |  i1  |  i2  |  i3  |  i4  |      |  iN  |
         +------+------+------+------+------+------+--...-+------+

   No "pad" sub-option is defined, and the Information field shall NOT
   be terminated with a 255 sub-option.  The length N of the DHCP Agent
   Information Option shall include all bytes of the sub-option
   code/length/value tuples.  Since at least one sub-option must be
   defined, the minimum Relay Agent Information length is two (2).  The
   length N of the sub-options shall be the number of octets in only
   that sub-option's value field.  A sub-option length may be zero.  The
   sub-options need not appear in sub-option code order.

   The initial assignment of DHCP Relay Agent Sub-options is as follows:

                 DHCP Agent              Sub-Option Description
                 Sub-option Code
                 ---------------         ----------------------
                     1                   Agent Circuit ID Sub-option
                     2                   Agent Remote ID Sub-option
>>>>

So I wonder now if DHCP option 82 refers to the DHCP Relay Information
option for which there are defined two sub-options (1: Agent Circuit ID
Sub-option and 2:                Agent Remote ID Sub-option").

Or do I misunderstand something here ?

Thanks in advance - Dirk


Dirk Van Aken                              THOMSON multimedia Broadband
Belgium NV
System Architect                           Prins Boudewijnlaan 47,
Tel. : 03/443.65.08                        2650 Edegem
Fax.: 03/443.66.32                         Belgium
vanakend@thmulti.com


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