Issue258

Title DHCP Option Under-Specified
Priority bug Status chatting
Superseder Nosy List pcalhoun
Assigned To pcalhoun Topics

Created on 2007-04-24.10:14:18 by mrw, last changed 2007-04-25.16:07:28 by pcalhoun.

Messages
msg713 (view) Author: pcalhoun Date: 2007-04-25.16:07:28
Please find below the actual text that is being proposed to resolve this 
issue. Note that a separate Internet Draft (attached) is being submitted which 
describes the actual DHCP option.
 
<proposed text>
3.3.  AC Discovery
[...]
   DHCP:  See [13] for more information on the use of DHCP to discover
      AC IP addresses.
 
16.1.  Normative References
   [13]  "draft-calhoun-dhc-capwap-ac-option-00".
</proposed text>
msg705 (view) Author: mrw Date: 2007-04-24.10:14:17
Section 3.2 of the base spec refers to a "DHCP code number".   There  
are several problems with this section, including:

(1) I think that this is talking about a DHCP option.  There isn't  
really anything called a "DHCP code number" or, as it is referred to  
in the IANA considerations section, a "DHCP code point".

(2) A comma-delimited ASCII text string is not the usual DHCP format  
for options that contain a list of servers.

(3) The information in this section is not sufficient to specify a  
new DHCP option.

See the following document for an example of how a DHCP option  
containing a list of servers has been specified in the past:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4075.txt

(4) We probably need options for both DHCP and DHCPv6.

My suggestion is that we remove the text from the base document that  
attempts to define a new DHCP option, and we produce a document that  
properly defines a CAPWAP DHCP option and publish it separately.
History
Date User Action Args
2007-04-25 16:07:28pcalhounsetstatus: unread -> chatting
nosy: + pcalhoun, - mrw
messages: + msg713
assignedto: pcalhoun
2007-04-24 10:14:18mrwcreate