Re: [dhcwg] Incorporation of WG last call comments in draft-aboba-dhc-domsearch-06.txt

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Wed, 26 September 2001 17:51 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24928; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:51:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA09294; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:48:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA09268 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:48:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from funnel.cisco.com (funnel.cisco.com [161.44.168.79]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA24857 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:48:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rdroms-w2k.cisco.com (dhcp-161-44-149-183.cisco.com [161.44.149.183]) by funnel.cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.1/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA24577; Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:47:31 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010926134104.03d8b110@funnel.cisco.com>
X-Sender: rdroms@funnel.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:45:25 -0400
To: Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com>
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Incorporation of WG last call comments in draft-aboba-dhc-domsearch-06.txt
Cc: Thomas Narten <narten@raleigh.ibm.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0109260657550.25790-100000@internaut.com>
References: <200109261102.f8QB27P04976@hygro.adsl.duke.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org

My comments are in line...

- Ralph

At 07:00 AM 9/26/2001 -0700, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> > Main item is that it has a normative reference to
> >
> > > [7]  Lemon, T., "Encoding Long DHCP Options", Internet draft (work in
> > >      progress), draft-ietf-dhc-concat-01.txt, July 2001.
> >
> > so these two document should go together.
>
>Not sure the reference is normative. This option can use the long option
>encoding if available, but doesn't require it.

Agreed; in fact, I think you could eliminate references to
the long option encoding draft w/o harming your spec...

> >
> > Some minor wording nits (these can be dealt with later):
> >
> > > the domain search list.  This document defines a new DHCP option which
> > > is passed from the DHCP Server to the DHCP Client to specify the domain
> > > search list when resolving hostnames.
> >
> > Is the option allowed to be included in client messages? I would
> > assume so. Indeed, isn't it the case that clients can include any
> > option if to signal a desire to the server to get such an option
> > returned? If so, I guess this isn't really an issue.
>
>Yes, that's my understanding.

Perhaps it would be easiest to change the sentence to: This document
defines a new DHCP option that specifies the domain search list
to be used by a DHCP client when resolving hostnames.


> >
> > > In this scheme, an entire domain name or a  list of labels at the end of
> > > a domain name is replaced with a pointer to a prior occurrence of the
> >
> > s/is replaced/can be replaced/
> >
> > > same name.  Despite its complexity, this technique is valuable since the
> >
> > Thomas
> >
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>dhcwg mailing list
>dhcwg@ietf.org
>http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg


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