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

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Tue, 06 October 2009 19:27 UTC

Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.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 599953A6806 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.609
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.990, 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 Nm-jtWZvstJV for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:27:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com (e35.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.153]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 761BE3A67FB for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:27:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n96JIS9j011094 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:18:28 -0600
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id n96JSuAf257020 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:28:58 -0600
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n96JSu9g026747 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:28:56 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-49-148-105.mts.ibm.com [9.49.148.105]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n96JSslA026657 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:28:55 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.12.5) with ESMTP id n96JSrCV005622; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 15:28:54 -0400
Message-Id: <200910061928.n96JSrCV005622@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-reply-to: <D4C9A450-68AD-45E2-AED4-189051D48D05@nominum.com>
References: <994ABFCB-3ABF-484C-9855-1EEACC663CF4@nominum.com> <200910061918.n96JI5Nv005405@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <D4C9A450-68AD-45E2-AED4-189051D48D05@nominum.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> message dated "Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:26:22 -0700."
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:28:53 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
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 19:27:28 -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?

I'm not saying its necessarily a big problem, but it's surely more
work (we can argue how much more) to have to go through an entire
message to find all the related options before being able to actually
process them, compared with just processing them in order, without
doing any lookahead.

And for very simple clients, this kind of work savings might well be a
considered a good thing.

Thomas