From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 1 13:01:51 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8FD42CA; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 13:01:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from remote.thehowies.com (50-197-91-217-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.197.91.217]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "remote.thehowies.com", Issuer "RapidSSL CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82A4C2B0E; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 13:01:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from PRIMARY.thehowies.local ([fe80::967:7eb6:ee49:3820]) by PRIMARY.thehowies.local ([fe80::967:7eb6:ee49:3820%11]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 06:01:48 -0700 From: John Howie To: "sthaug@nethelp.no" Subject: Re: Patches for BOOTP/DHCP code to support Windows Server DHCP Thread-Topic: Patches for BOOTP/DHCP code to support Windows Server DHCP Thread-Index: AQHPfUBUW2MQdiTIGUuysOzuLv/2xptcPzcAgAC3qoD//66HgP//k2Lc Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 13:01:48 +0000 Message-ID: <0FF4F173-8D6A-4664-AA31-FB1BF28A7E74@thehowies.com> References: <20140601.082448.74710838.sthaug@nethelp.no> , <20140601.143033.41674928.sthaug@nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: <20140601.143033.41674928.sthaug@nethelp.no> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 13:01:51 -0000 Hi Steinar, I could ask you to 'prove it', too, but I can easily check when I get back = from my current travels :-) It important to note that even if it does (as I think it does) it is NOT in= violation of the RFC. The RFC simply says that if a client wants something= it should ask for it, and not that a server cannot send the options unsoli= cited. Best regards, John Sent from my iPhone On Jun 1, 2014, at 19:30, "sthaug@nethelp.no" wrote: >> In short, no, I have no packet traces. Given that the DHCP code in the >> FreeBSD boot loader and NFS subsystem does not request those options, bu= t >> that ISC-DHCP does provide them, I will go out on a limb and say that it >> must be serving them without being asked if they are configured. >=20 > In that case I'm afraid I must stand by my claim that you're wrong > and ISC DHCP does *not* provide configured options unless the client > asks for them. >=20 > (And I have copious amounts of packet sniffer traces to prove this.) >=20 > Not that this is particularly relevant to FreeBSD any more... >=20 > Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no